tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-87318492703384857232018-05-20T10:50:36.541-04:00View-from-WilmingtonShouting at the ocean with pebbles in my mouth since 2008. The subjects of this blog include forensics, the war-on-terror detainees, the Duke lacrosse case, the Knox/Sollecito case, and the academic world as it intersects the political. It will sometimes examine issues of particular interest to Wilmington, NC and the University of North Carolina at Wilmington.Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comBlogger71125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-79492421765734565952017-07-06T16:22:00.000-04:002017-07-18T10:46:04.034-04:00Otto Warmbier: In the wrong place at the wrong time<div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot;;">Otto Warmbier’s return to the United States prompted Professor Katherine Dettwyler to <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2017/06/23/ud-professor-says-otto-warmbier-got-what-he-deserved/424741001/" target="_blank">indicate</a> that he got what he deserved</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot;;">.&nbsp; She also said compared Mr. Warmbier to her own students: “These are the same kids who cry about their grades because they didn't think they'd really have to read and study the material to get a good grade ... His parents ultimately are to blame for his growing up thinking he could get away with whatever he wanted. Maybe in the US, where young, white, rich, clueless white males routinely get away with raping women. Not so much in North Korea. And of course, it's Ottos' parents who will pay the price for the rest of their lives.”&nbsp; Although her remarks on Facebook are no longer public, she is reported to have made similar comments at a news story about the case. &nbsp;The University of Delaware distanced itself from her comments, but whether it was this incident or others related to her politicization of her anthropology <a href="http://udreview.com/anthropology-professor-under-scrutiny-for-saying-otto-warmbier-got-what-he-deserved/" target="_blank">class</a> led to her contract not being renewed is unclear, one of a <a href="https://heterodoxacademy.org/2017/06/28/professors-must-now-fear-intimidation-from-both-sides/" target="_blank">number</a> of terminations around the country recently</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot;;">.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot;;">Professor Dettwyler’s comments lack empathy and imagination; her extremely ill-judged comments are especially troubling in that they demean her own students, although they fall short of warranting her termination (Full disclosure: I attempted to contact her in an effort to convince her to modify her position on Mr. Warmbier). &nbsp;Solely for the sake of argument, let us first take as a given that Mr. Warmbier removed the propaganda banner.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>One might ask whether a police officer would waste his or her time on such a minor offense; that his death was a deserved outcome is indefensible.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot;;">Professor Dettwyler’s comments take the existence of an epidemic of college sexual assault as something so obvious that it needed no support or further explanation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However, Robbie Soave and KC Johnson among others have helped to demonstrate that statistics purporting to support the putative epidemic of assaults are highly dubious.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Even if widespread college sexual assault did exist, the linkage between this serious felony and the removal of a banner is nonexistent. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>If confronted with a <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">reasonable</i> punishment, Mr. Warmbier had asked for additional leniency, one could argue that this had something to do with white, fratboy privilege. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Mr. Warmbier called it the worst mistake of his life and asked for the North Koreans to think of his family, not his skin color.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Nevertheless, he was sentenced to a Draconian 15 years at hard labor.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Professor Dettwyler’s attempt to connect Mr. Warmbier’s actions with white privilege fails on multiple grounds.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot;;">Moreover, the implied premise of her argument, that Warmbier’s confession represented an accurate account of his actions does not stand up to an hour’s research on the internet.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Mr. Warmbier’s confession indicated that the Friendship United Methodist Church, the Z society at the University of Virginia, and the United States Government were involved in some sort of conspiracy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A deaconess at the Friendship United Methodist church was supposed to have offered a car worth $10,000 for the banner and $200,000 if he were detained. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Yet the pastor denied knowing the person claimed to be a deaconess, and the page listing the staff at the church’s website does not identify anyone as a deacon or a deaconess.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Mr. Warmbier’s alleged motivation was serious family financial distress, but his father denied that this was true.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot;;">A spokesperson for the semi-secret <a href="http://gawker.com/is-this-american-bro-going-to-north-korean-prison-becau-1765365712" target="_blank">Z society</a>, which focuses on philanthropy at UVa, has indicated that there was no contact between this organization and Mr. Warmbier.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Mr. Warmbier’s mother is Jewish, and the memorial service was led by Rabbi Jake Rubin, who had traveled to Israel with Mr. Warmbier, who seemed to identify as Jewish after this trip.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This prompts the question of why he would be keen to help someone at the Friendship United Methodist Church obtain a “trophy.” <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>How the removal of a banner in a hotel corridor would weaken the motivation and work ethic of the North Korean people remains unclear.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Mr. Warmbier’s confession, which was preposterous at the outset, under examination looks like a gumbo of highly improbable or outright false statements. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>One could parse its syntax or put it into the context of forced confessions in North Korea for additional evidence, but it is more productive to move on to a different hypothesis, that Mr. Warmbier took down the banner for reason unrelated to this alleged conspiracy.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot;;">This alternative is less easy to falsify but is still highly problematic.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A Danish fellow traveler indicated that she and Mr. Warmbier <a href="https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/nation-and-world/thousands-gather-for-funeral-for-student-detained-in-n-korea/" target="_blank">shopped</a> for propaganda posters, which are readily available in stores.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Were these posters not to Mr. Warmbier’s taste?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>How did Mr. Warmbier obtain access to a staff-only (“restricted” in some accounts) area of the hotel?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>How would he know that the banner’s characters conveyed propaganda and not a reminder that staff must always wash their hands after using the lavatory?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Why would he take down a banner that was, according to the North Korean account, too large to keep?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The video that purports to show Mr. Warmbier’s taking down the banner is too indistinct to be probative.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>It is also curious to some that the corridor is well-lit. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Some have described Mr. Warmbier as being mature.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Indeed, Susan Svrluga’s detailed <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2017/06/22/lets-bring-it-in-otto-warmbiers-family-and-friends-celebrate-his-life/?utm_term=.f3368f39e8ee" target="_blank">account</a> of Mr. Warmbier’s memorial service indicates that he was a focused, exceptional student, a well-regarded friend, and an exemplary role model for his brother.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Although character evidence does not preclude his committing a reckless act, it is one more pebble on the scale.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot;;">If Mr. Warmbier did not take down the poster, then why was he detained?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Mr. Warmbier’s British roommate, Danny Gratton, said that they did not receive their customary wake-up call on the morning of 2 January, making them the last of their tour group to depart.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>An anonymous source said that Mr. Warmbier’s roommate, Mr. Gratton, became separated from the rest of the tour group for several hours in the early morning of New Year’s day, 2016, roughly coinciding with the time of the banner’s allegedly being taken down (1:57 AM).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Mr. Warmbier’s whereabouts during this time have not been verified.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>One possible scenario is that the intended detainee was not Mr. Warmbier but was Mr. Gratton instead.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Or perhaps even knowing of Mr. Gratton’s disappearance, the North Koreans detained Mr. Warmbier because he was an American citizen.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Time</i>&nbsp;<a href="http://time.com/4192050/north-korea-kim-jong-un-otto-frederick-warmbier-human-rights/" target="_blank">quoted</a> Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director of Human Rights Watch: “When North Korea gets into a diplomatic dispute with the U.S. government, they like to grab any American they can find and use them as bargaining chips.” <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Along with what happened during his detention, one can only speculate.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG/> <o:PixelsPerInch>96</o:PixelsPerInch> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:DoNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="false" DefSemiHidden="false" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99" LatentStyleCount="382"> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footnote text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="header"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footer"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="table of figures"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="envelope address"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="envelope return"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footnote reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="line number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="page number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="endnote reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="endnote text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="table of authorities"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="macro"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toa heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Closing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Signature"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Message Header"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Salutation"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Date"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text First Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text First Indent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Block Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Hyperlink"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="FollowedHyperlink"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Document Map"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Plain Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="E-mail Signature"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Top of Form"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Bottom of Form"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal (Web)"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Acronym"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Address"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Cite"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Code"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Definition"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Keyboard"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Preformatted"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Sample"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Typewriter"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Variable"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal Table"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation subject"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="No List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Contemporary"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Elegant"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Professional"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Subtle 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Subtle 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Balloon Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="Table Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Theme"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Placeholder Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Revision"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Bibliography"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="41" Name="Plain Table 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="42" Name="Plain Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="43" Name="Plain Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="44" Name="Plain Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="45" Name="Plain Table 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="40" Name="Grid Table Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Mention"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Smart Hyperlink"/> </w:LatentStyles></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 10]><style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style><![endif]--> <!--StartFragment--> <!--EndFragment--><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot;;">Isaac Fish <a href="http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/23/otto-warmbier-north-korea-tour-company-215299" target="_blank">wrote</a> that Mr. Warmbier was in the wrong place at the wrong time.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Despite the fact that roughly eight hundred Americans visit North Korea every year one can legitimately argue that he was foolish to go there.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Indeed, when Mr. Warmbier spoke of making the worst mistake of his life, he may have meant simply traveling to North Korea. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>In a time when some academicians were less in the grip of narratives concerning race and privilege and when partisan politics stopped “at the water’s edge,” perhaps the whole country would have mourned the untimely and unexplained death of a highly promising young man who was improperly imprisoned.<o:p></o:p></span></div>Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-21048802928940288222017-01-25T18:48:00.000-05:002017-01-25T18:48:00.172-05:00A new book on forensic science and the law<div align="left" class="p1" style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">I am pleased to announce the publication of Forensic Science Reform Protecting the Innocent. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Besides being one of the editors, Wendy J. Koen wrote the majority of the case studies which are part of each chapter.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Kimberly Lott and I coauthored the chapter on presumptive and confirmatory blood testing, a recurring subject of this blog.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>I am very grateful for the illuminating discussions here and elsewhere on this topic. &nbsp;<o:p></o:p></span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The Knox/Sollecito murder trial is the featured case in Chapter 7, and it is briefly discussed in Chapter 8.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">&nbsp; </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The case of Lindy and Michael Chamberlain is highlighted in the latter chapter.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">&nbsp; </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The Cameron Todd Willingham arson investigation is the featured case in Chapter 3.</span></div><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG/> <o:PixelsPerInch>96</o:PixelsPerInch> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:DoNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="&#45;-"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="false" DefSemiHidden="false" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99" LatentStyleCount="382"> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footnote text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="header"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footer"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="table of figures"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="envelope address"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="envelope return"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footnote reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="line number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="page number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="endnote reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="endnote text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="table of authorities"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="macro"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toa heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Closing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Signature"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Message Header"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Salutation"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Date"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text First Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text First Indent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Block Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Hyperlink"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="FollowedHyperlink"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Document Map"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Plain Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="E-mail Signature"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Top of Form"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Bottom of Form"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal (Web)"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Acronym"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Address"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Cite"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Code"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Definition"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Keyboard"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Preformatted"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Sample"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Typewriter"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Variable"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal Table"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation subject"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="No List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Contemporary"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Elegant"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Professional"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Subtle 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Subtle 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Balloon Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="Table Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Theme"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Placeholder Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Revision"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Bibliography"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="41" Name="Plain Table 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="42" Name="Plain Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="43" Name="Plain Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="44" Name="Plain Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="45" Name="Plain Table 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="40" Name="Grid Table Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Mention"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Smart Hyperlink"/> </w:LatentStyles></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 10]><style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style><![endif]--> <!--StartFragment--> <!--EndFragment--><div class="p1"><br /></div><div class="p1"><b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">Forensic Science Reform<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="p1"><b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">Protecting the Innocent<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="p1"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Elsevier, 2017<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="p1"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">ISBN: 978-0-12-802719-6<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="p1"><br /></div><div class="p2"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">Edited by Wendy J. Koen and C. Michael Bowers<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="p2"><br /></div><div class="p1"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">1. Comparative Bullet Lead Analysis</span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">, Max M. Houck<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="p1"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">2. Microscopic Hair Comparison</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">, Max M. Houck</span></div><div class="p1"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">3. Arson</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">, John Lentini and Rachel Dioso-Villa</span></div><div class="p1"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">4. Shaken Baby Syndrome</span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">, Waney Squier<span class="apple-converted-space">&nbsp;</span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="p2"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">5. Bite Mark Evidence</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">, C. Michael Bowers and Ray Krone</span></div><div class="p1"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">6. Firearms Identification, Sarah L. Cooper</span></div><div class="p2"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">7. DNA Evidence</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">, Dan Krane and Simon Ford<span class="apple-converted-space">&nbsp;</span></span></div><div class="p1"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">8.</span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp; </span></span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Presumptive and Confirmatory Blood Testing</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">, Christopher Halkides and Kim Lott</span></div><div class="p2"><span style="font-size: 12pt;">9.<span class="apple-converted-space">&nbsp; </span>Bloodstain Pattern Analysis, </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Barie Goetz<span class="apple-converted-space">&nbsp;</span></span></div><div class="p1"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">10.</span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp; </span></span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Crime Scene Reconstruction</span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">, Barie Goetz</span></div><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG/> <o:PixelsPerInch>96</o:PixelsPerInch> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:DoNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="&#45;-"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="false" DefSemiHidden="false" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99" LatentStyleCount="382"> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footnote text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="header"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footer"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="table of figures"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="envelope address"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="envelope return"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footnote reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="line number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="page number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="endnote reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="endnote text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="table of authorities"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="macro"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toa heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Closing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Signature"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Message Header"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Salutation"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Date"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text First Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text First Indent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Block Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Hyperlink"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="FollowedHyperlink"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Document Map"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Plain Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="E-mail Signature"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Top of Form"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Bottom of Form"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal (Web)"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Acronym"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Address"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Cite"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Code"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Definition"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Keyboard"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Preformatted"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Sample"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Typewriter"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Variable"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal Table"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation subject"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="No List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Contemporary"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Elegant"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Professional"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Subtle 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Subtle 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Balloon Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="Table Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Theme"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Level 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Placeholder Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Revision"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Bibliography"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="41" Name="Plain Table 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="42" Name="Plain Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="43" Name="Plain Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="44" Name="Plain Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="45" Name="Plain Table 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="40" Name="Grid Table Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Mention"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Smart Hyperlink"/> </w:LatentStyles></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 10]><style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style><![endif]--> <!--StartFragment--> <!--EndFragment--><br /><div class="p1"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">11. Fingerprints</span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">, Kathleen L. Bright-Birnbaum<o:p></o:p></span></div>Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-42253994584016321362016-08-17T09:34:00.000-04:002016-08-17T09:34:53.128-04:00The use of stomach contents to estimate time of death<div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>Background</i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The present article focuses on the contents of the stomach and how they change with time, in the context of whether or not one can obtain useful information on the time of death.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The stomach uses a combination of mechanical action and hydrolytic enzymes such as pepsin to break food down into smaller particles and simpler chemicals.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Kong and Singh (2008) reviewed the physiology of the stomach, including factors that affect the rate at which the stomach empties.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A <a href="http://arbl.cvmbs.colostate.edu/hbooks/pathphys/digestion/basics/transit.html" target="_blank">website</a> at Colorado State has a helpful graphic showing the transit times of material in the digestive system.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span><span style="font-family: Times;">The digestive system potentially has more than one type of evidence that it can provide an investigator.</span><span style="font-family: Times;">&nbsp; </span><span style="font-family: Times;">The rate at which digestive material moves from the stomach into the small intestine can suggest something about the time of death relative to the time of the last meal. This issue was the subject of a previous blog <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2012/07/time-of-death-in-murder-of-meredith.html" target="_blank">entry</a> that considered the Knox/Sollecito case.</span><span style="font-family: Times;">&nbsp; </span><span style="font-family: Times;">We will start with a relatively recent addition to the literature on stomach contents and time of death, and then examine individual cases, most of which come from older literature.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>Patel et al. (2013)</i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Patel and coworkers coauthored a <a href="http://www.scopemed.org/?mno=40697" target="_blank">paper</a> which correlated the contents of the stomachs of 100 deceased individuals with known times of death and times of last meal.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The authors divided the contents as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Category I:<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>semi-digested food particles<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Category II:<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>semi-digested unidentifiable food particles<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Category III:<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>empty stomach<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Category I was found more commonly in those dying within 0-2 hours after their last meal.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Category II was found more commonly in those dying within 2-6 hours after their last meal.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Category III was found more commonly in those dying more than 6 hours after their last meal.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">19 cases fell into category I, of which 16 (84%) had consumed their final meal in 0-2 hours before death, 2 cases had eaten 2-4 hours before death (11%), and one person had eaten 4-6 hours before death (5%).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>For category II, the most likely situation encountered was that the last meal was taken 2-4 hours before death (49%), but there were a number of cases in which it was 0-2 (13%), 4-6 hours (26%), or greater than 6 hours (11%).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The span of 2-6 hours covered 75% of the individuals.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>For category III the most likely situation encountered was that the last meal was consumed more than 6 hour before death.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The authors discussed the composition of the meal, noting that a carbohydrate meal leaves the stomach most quickly, a protein meal leaves at an intermediate rate, and a fatty meal leaves the stomach most slowly.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>I will use this paper as a guide to evaluate some earlier cases.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>Horowitz and Pounder (1985)</i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Horowitz and Pounder wrote, “There is a significant variation in emptying rates between normal subjects, but under controlled conditions gastric emptying of a test meal is relatively reproducible in normal individuals.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>These authors note that many things can affect the rate of gastric emptying, such as certain drugs, stressful stimuli, and diseases.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">They wrote, “In those occasional instances where the gastric contents provide the only practicable means of evaluating the time of death some guidelines can be offered.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>First only the digestible solid component of the meal should be assessed…Second the weight of the solid component should be compared with the estimated weight of the known last meal…Third, the confidence limits of any opinion should take into consideration the many possible variables, so that the estimate given should cover a ranges of at least some hours.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>They conclude by saying, “Estimates to within half an hour clearly cannot be justified in the light of present knowledge of patterns of gastric emptying.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>For forensic purposes the stomach is a very poor timekeeper.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>Jaffe (1989)</i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Dr. Frederick Jaffe authored an article in which the abstract read in part, “Using it [stomach contents] as a guide to the time of death, however, is theoretically unsound and presents many practical difficulties, although it may have limited applicability in some exceptional instances.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The article discussed three cases.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>I will take the facts as presented in this article as givens, but a few of them are in dispute. &nbsp;I will mention the controversial points of which I am aware without taking a position on them.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">In the Steven Truscott case, the victim ate at 5:50 PM and was in the presence of Steven Truscott between 6:30 and 8:25 PM.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The pathologist put the time of death as being between 7:15 and 7:45 but later had misgivings about this range (Dr. Jaffe’s remarks indicate strong skepticism about this level of precision).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>One <a href="https://www.aidwyc.org/cases/historical/steven-truscott/" target="_blank">source</a> indicates that Steven Truscott was seen at 8 PM on the grounds of a school.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span><span style="font-family: Times;">In the David Hendricks case, Mr. Hendricks’ wife and three children were killed.</span><span style="font-family: Times;">&nbsp; </span><span style="font-family: Times;">Fragments of vegetables were found in their stomachs.</span><span style="font-family: Times;">&nbsp; </span><span style="font-family: Times;">One expert put the time of death at 2-4 hours after the consumption of pizza, the known last meal, and two put it at 1-3 hours.</span><span style="font-family: Times;">&nbsp; </span><span style="font-family: Times;">Mr. Hendricks left his house on a trip 4.5 to 5.5 hours after the meal.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">In the Crimmins case, the two children were fed at 7:30 and an abduction would have taken place about 9 hours later, if Mrs. Crimmins’ account were accurate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Yet, recognizable food was found in one of the children’s stomachs.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Assuming that their meal was indeed manicotti and string beans&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times;">(Mrs Crimmins stated that it was veal)</span><span style="font-family: Times;">, Dr. Jaffe indicated that this was not reasonable.</span><span style="font-family: Times;">&nbsp; </span><span style="font-family: Times;">This is the only case in which Dr. Jaffe implies that stomach contents were useful in ascertaining an approximate time of death.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>Davis (1989)</i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Dr. Joseph Davis wrote a letter in response to Dr. Jaffe’s article, focused on the Hendricks case.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Dr. Davis discussed how the length of time for the stomach to empty increased with increasing size of the meal.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>With respect to the three children he wrote, “Although the evidence was not as close to absolute as in the Crimmins case, which involved an 8 ½ h postprandial period, it is well within accepted probability that a coincidental delay in gastric emptying time would not occur in all three victims.”<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>Pope (2012)</i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">During an attempted robbery in Eugene, OR, the suspect was killed in an exchange of fire with a barista.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Examination of his stomach contents revealed contents suggesting the consumption of a bacon cheeseburger and French fries.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The size of the French fry was a clue that helped narrow down the identity of the fast food restaurant.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This information prompted investigators to examine security footage from a local fast food restaurant, where they identified the deceased suspect and a second suspect, who was later arrested.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>About an hour elapsed between the time that the two suspects were in the restaurant and the time of the attempted robbery.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>Conclusions</i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">In the Truscott case, the victim probably died within 2 hours of consuming her last meal, but she might have died up to about four hours after her last meal.</span><span style="font-family: Times;">&nbsp; </span><span style="font-family: Times;">In addition, there is some uncertainty about the time that Truscott was later seen.</span><span style="font-family: Times;">&nbsp; </span><span style="font-family: Times;">There is no support in the literature for the narrow 30-minute window. &nbsp;If the&nbsp;victim ate near 5:50 and Mr. Truscott left her presence before 8 PM, it is quite possible that she died afterwards. &nbsp;Therefore, the stomach contents were overinterpreted in his case.</span><span style="font-family: Times;">&nbsp; </span><span style="font-family: Times;">In the Hendricks case the TOD was unlikely to have been more than four hours beyond the consumption of the last meal, and the similarity among the contents of the three stomachs means that any factor that might have slowed digestion for one child would probably have to have slowed it for all three.</span><span style="font-family: Times;">&nbsp; </span><span style="font-family: Times;">In the Crimmins case the contents of the stomach were correctly interpreted as ruling out an abduction later than 4 AM, and the only uncertainty is in what the children ate for dinner.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Dr. Jaffe correctly cautioned his readers about dangers of overinterpreting stomach contents as they relate to TOD.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Yet there are clearly examples in which information on the time of death or time of last meal based upon contents of the stomach was helpful to investigators.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>It seems that stomach contents are more useful under some circumstances than others.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The estimate will be in the form of a range of several hours.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If the time of the last meal is not known, then only a relative time of death can be ascertained.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If the time of a meal is known, but the type of food is not known, then some uncertainty exists with respect to whether or not it is the last meal that the deceased person ate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If the time and nature (size and type of food) of the last meal is known, then if identifiable material is found, the last meal was probably consumed within two hours, with an outside chance that it was consumed between two and six hours before death, unless some exceptional circumstances are at work.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If the stomach is empty, then the time of death is likely to be more than 6 hours after consumption of the last meal, but it could be 2-6 hours.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>References</i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Davis JH, “Gastric Emptying Time” (1989) <i>American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology</i> 10(3) 271-272.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Horowitz M, Pounder DJ, “Is the stomach a useful forensic clock?” (1985) Austr NZ J Med 15, 273-276.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Jaffe F, “Stomach Contents and Time of Death:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Reexamination of a Persistent Question” (1989)<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>American Jounal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology</i> 10(1) 37-41.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Kong F, Sing RP “Disintegration of Solid Foods in the Human Stomach” (2008) <i>Journal of Food Science</i> 73(5) R67-R80.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Patel V, Silajiya D, Shah K, Menat A, Tandel M, and Raloti S, “Estimation of time since death by gastric contents” (2013) <i>IJCRR</i> 5(11), 125-129.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Pope L “<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Identification of a Second Suspect via Stomach Contents at Autopsy” (2012)&nbsp;</span></span><i style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12pt;">J Assoc Crime Scene Reconstr. </i><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12pt;">18(2) 13-15.</span></div><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span>Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-43401639401033948782014-12-15T20:01:00.000-05:002015-05-18T21:48:55.129-04:00A reconsideration of the DNA forensics in the Duke lacrosse case<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:DocumentProperties> <o:Template>Normal.dotm</o:Template> <o:Revision>0</o:Revision> <o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime> <o:Pages>1</o:Pages> <o:Words>4957</o:Words> <o:Characters>28257</o:Characters> <o:Company>UNCW</o:Company> <o:Lines>235</o:Lines> <o:Paragraphs>56</o:Paragraphs> <o:CharactersWithSpaces>34701</o:CharactersWithSpaces> <o:Version>12.0</o:Version> </o:DocumentProperties> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG/> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing> <w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing> <w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery> <w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/> <w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/> </w:Compatibility> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="276"> </w:LatentStyles></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 10]><style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style><![endif]--> <!--StartFragment--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal">Updated 5/18/2015<br /><br /><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Times;">Introduction<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">In the spring of 2006 three players on the Duke lacrosse team were indicted for rape and kidnapping.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The accuser claimed to have been raped by three men at least one of whom ejaculated inside of her body.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Some DNA results emerged in the spring of 2006. Eventually additional evidence was uncovered, and the overwhelming perception that this evidence was exculpatory brought about a major turning point in public opinion prior to the declaration of innocence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>After evidence of his misconduct emerged, the district attorney withdrew from the case, which then fell to the office of the Attorney General of North Carolina to investigate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>After the investigation was complete, the Attorney General declared the three players to be innocent in the spring of 2007, and the criminal matter ended.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The Duke lacrosse case is generally perceived as a highly visible case of prosecutorial misconduct and a rush to judgment by the press and the general public.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However with the 2014 publication of William Cohan’s book <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Price of Silence</i>, this view has now been challenged, and Mr. Cohan’s view of the DNA evidence is at odds with many who have commented on the case.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Therefore, a reevaluation of the DNA evidence is warranted on the basis of a general understanding of this case, as well as other cases in which the DNA evidence plays a central role, such as the Knox/Sollecito case, a frequent subject of this blog.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Times;">The initial results from the rape kit:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Is the absence of evidence evidence of absence?<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The initial results from the NC SBI laboratory did not find semen, blood, or saliva.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Subsequently Y-chromosomal (Y-STR) tests were performed at a private laboratory.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Investigators found no DNA from any Duke lacrosse player in the rape kit items but did find DNA from Mangum’s boyfriend.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>DNA from plastic fingernails was also extracted.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Some of the results from the private lab were released in a brief report issued on May 10, 2006, but other results were withheld.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Apart from the plastic fingernails (discussed below), how significant was the lack of DNA? <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">One <a href="http://creativedestruction.wordpress.com/2006/04/15/experts-answer-what-does-dna-evidence-prove/" target="_blank">blogger</a> posed questions along these lines to several highly qualified experts, including Dan Krane, Elizabeth Johnson, and William Thompson.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Dan Krane responded: “It is worth noting that DNA tests are amazingly sensitive (DNA profiles can be generated from as little material as that left behind in a fingerprint) and Y-STR tests have the potential of determining a male’s DNA profile even when a female’s DNA is present in hundreds or thousands of times greater quantities. Scientists are always wary of asserting that the absence of evidence is not proof of absence but it certainly is reasonable to expect to find a rapist’s DNA associated with a victim when the victim presents herself to investigators within hours of an attack and when she has not bathed, the rapist did not use a condom and ejaculation occurred.” <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>These experts gave thoughtful, nuanced replies. The consensus view seemed to be that the degree to which the absence of evidence was evidence of absence lies in the particulars of each case.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">What then are the particulars of the Duke lacrosse case?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A <a href="http://www.reed.edu/sexual_assault/immediately_after/preserving_evidence.html" target="_blank">site</a> at Reed College lists the following guidelines for preserving evidence of a possible sexual assault:<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-text-indent-alt: 0in; text-indent: 0in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Times; mso-bidi-font-family: Times; mso-fareast-font-family: Times;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;</span></span></span><span style="font-family: Times;">“Do not shower or douche<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-text-indent-alt: 0in; text-indent: 0in;"><span style="font-family: Times;">Try not to urinate. Urinating may reduce the ability to detect “date rape” drugs<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-text-indent-alt: 0in; text-indent: 0in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Times; mso-bidi-font-family: Times; mso-fareast-font-family: Times;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;</span></span></span><span style="font-family: Times;">If there was oral contact, do not smoke, eat, or brush teeth<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-text-indent-alt: 0in; text-indent: 0in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Times; mso-bidi-font-family: Times; mso-fareast-font-family: Times;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font: 7.0pt &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;</span></span></span><span style="font-family: Times;">Do not change clothes. If you have already changed your clothes, place them in a paper bag (plastic may destroy evidence) If you haven’t changed, keep the original clothes on and bring an extra set to wear home from the hospital<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Go to a hospital with the capability of providing a SAFE exam and request the exam. The cost of a SAFE examination is paid for from a state fund.”</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The alleged victim in the Duke lacrosse case was taken into custody shortly after the incident and did not have the opportunity to shower or to change clothes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Therefore, the chances of preserving evidence would have been high, if an actual assault had occurred.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>William Anderson <a href="http://www.lewrockwell.com/2008/04/william-l-anderson/duke-why-the-dna-mattered/" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “Furthermore, no one — no one — who inspected the room (and police gave that bathroom a thorough inspection, taking swabs everywhere and testing for DNA) found any evidence of bleach products having been recently used. They found no DNA of Mangum, and none of [Collin] Finnerty and [Reade] Seligmann, and nothing else that demonstrated that either of those two young men had ever been in that bathroom.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Parenthetically, Taylor and Johnson reported that no fingerprints belonging to Mr. Finnerty were found in the bathroom (<i>Until Proven Innocent</i>, p. 183).<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Unfortunately, the question of whether or not the accuser said that the victims used condoms has been not entirely without controversy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson wrote (<i>Until Proven Innocent</i>, p. 327), “In her report from the night of the alleged attack, [SANE nurse Tara] Levicy had written without qualification that Mangum had said repeatedly…the rapists had used no condoms and that she was sure that at least one had ejaculated—<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">in her mouth</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>But on January 10 [2007, nine months later], according to [Linwood] Wilson, Levicy stated that Mangum “said ‘no’ but wasn’t really sure” whether her attackers had used condoms.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Even if one finds Ms. Levicy to be credible about Ms. Mangum’s lack of certainty (which I do not), DNA may be transferred by simple physical contact, as is borne out in studies of simulated <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/07/dna-transfer-in-strangulation.html" target="_blank">strangulation</a>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In addition, <a href="http://www.forensicmag.com/articles/2012/06/touch-dna-analysis-using-literature-help-answer-some-common-questions" target="_blank">perspiration</a> contains DNA, and sebaceous fluid is a probable source of touch DNA, according to a <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24727431" target="_blank">study</a> by Vecchiotti, Filippini and their coworkers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Thus even when a condom is used during a sexual assault, there may be transfer of DNA.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Asked whether or not the use of a condom could have been detected, Elizabeth Johnson <a href="http://creativedestruction.wordpress.com/2006/04/15/experts-answer-what-does-dna-evidence-prove/" target="_blank">responded</a>, “</span><span style="font-family: Times; mso-bidi-font-family: Verdana; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.0pt;">Testing for these substances is not typically done, despite what you see on CSI. There has been some research done re spermicides on condoms, but none of this is done as part of a typical test and validated methods for casework aren’t there yet.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Of course, even if condom use were detected, it would not differentiate between consensual and nonconsensual sexual activity.</span><span style="font-family: Times;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The lack of body fluids is absence of evidence in its own right.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>It also weakens the DNA evidence, meaning that a given DNA profile found in the absence of a particular fluid might have arisen from any biological tissue or fluid.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Peter Gill describes framework or hierarchy of levels (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Misleading DNA Evidence</i>, p. 19) at which DNA evidence can be evaluated:<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Times; mso-bidi-font-family: Times; mso-fareast-font-family: Times;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-family: Times;">The <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">sub-source</i> level refers to the strength of evidence of the DNA profile itself.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Times; mso-bidi-font-family: Times; mso-fareast-font-family: Times;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-family: Times;">The <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">source</i> level is an evaluation of the strength of the DNA profile if it can be associated with a particular body fluid, such as semen or blood<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Times; mso-bidi-font-family: Times; mso-fareast-font-family: Times;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-family: Times;">The <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">activity</i> level associates the DNA with the crime itself, e.g. sexual assault.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Times; mso-bidi-font-family: Times; mso-fareast-font-family: Times;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">4.<span style="font: 7.0pt &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-family: Times;">The highest level deals with the ultimate issue of guilt/innocence.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Professor Gill’s book gives examples of cases in which a forensic scientist attempted to claim a higher level for the evidence than was warranted, based upon principles of forensics and probability.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The DNA of the rape kit is sub-source DNA, in this categorization.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The lack of DNA from the accused coupled with the lack of body fluids and the lack of other evidence in the bathroom is strongly exculpatory.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Whether or not it constitutes “proof of innocence” cannot be determined without defining the term.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However, I would weight this lack of evidence more heavily that eyewitness testimony, even if the latter came from a credible witness, owing to the well-known problems with eyewitness testimony.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Ms. Mangum’s credibility is questionable on a number of grounds.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Times;">The plastic fingernails in the trashcan<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Ms. Mangum’s painted fingernails were placed in the trashcan of the bathroom and the players pointed them out to the police investigators days later.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>David Evans could not be excluded as a donor.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The <a href="http://www.ncdoj.gov/getdoc/29748585-538e-43be-9de2-113628743d57/SummaryConclusions.aspx" target="_blank">summary of conclusions</a> from the office of the Attorney General of North Carolina stated on p. 12, "First, statistically, the chance of randomly selecting an individual from the population that could be included in this sample would be approximately 1 in 1000." With respect to the autosomal (standard DNA) profile, David Evans (along with about 2% of the population) cannot be excluded as a donor.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Likewise in the Y-chromosomal (YSTR) testing, David Evans cannot be excluded as a donor.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Although the summary report did not explain the calculations, the value of 1 in 1000 probably derives from combining the data from the two types of DNA testing.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The author of a 2014 book on the case (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Price of Silence</i>), William Cohan clearly thought that the DNA was highly incriminating, discussing it on pp. 277-278 and pp. 325-326, among other places.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>In the final chapter, Denouement, he returned to the subject on p. 602:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>“What remains unresolved is, if in fact it was David Evans’s DNA on Mangum’s red plastic fingernails, how did it get there?” <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">DNA evidence beneath real fingernails typically is probative, not necessarily conclusive, evidence against a defendant.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Studies have shown that mixtures of DNA under fingernails are seen about 5% of the time (Gill, pp. 43-46).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However, there is less to the DNA from the plastic fingernails than meets the eye.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Taylor and Johnson wrote (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Until</i> <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Proven</i> <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Innocent</i>, p. 221), “And it would later become clear…that the DNA that might (or might not) have come from Evans had <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not</i> necessarily been lodged “under” a plastic fingernail.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Rather, the SBI had extracted and mixed together all of the DNA taken from all surfaces of the three used plastic fingernails found in the wastebasket in Evans’ bathroom.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Moreover, a case in Britain involving a taxi driver, David Butler suggests some additional caveats.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>His DNA was apparently found on the fingernails of a murdered woman Anne Marie Foy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>He was convicted partially on the basis of the DNA evidence but later released.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A plausible theory is that he handled money which later carried his DNA to the victim.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>There are not many forensic details that have been made public, but a few things can be gleaned from the information that is available.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>One is that Mr. Butler's skin was unusually flaky.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Two is&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-19412819" target="_blank">Hannah Barnes' report</a> that "The victim was also wearing a glitter nail polish, which proved particularly attractive to dirt - and DNA."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The defense correctly noted that David Evans was not uniquely identified in either of the tests.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The defense’s position was that if David Evans were a donor of the DNA, then there existed a plausible route for innocent DNA deposition, namely secondary transfer from materials in trashcan, such as dental floss and tissue paper.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Defense attorney Joseph Cheshire, "Any expert and any person in the world will tell you that your [own] DNA is in your bathroom." (Cohan, p. 242).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Saliva is a good source of DNA, for example. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>The office of the attorney general of North Carolina accepted the possibility of secondary transfer as a reasonable explanation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In the summary document pertaining to this case, the authors wrote: “Third, to the extent that Evans’s DNA could not be excluded, the SBI experts confirmed that the DNA could easily have been transferred to the fingernails from other materials in the trash can.” <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">It is uncontroversial that the presence of DNA does not indicate the time or manner of its deposition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This cuts both ways: one cannot be certain that the DNA on the plastic fingernails arrived by secondary transfer, but neither can one rule it out.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Secondary transfer in DNA forensics is well established, and tertiary transfer has been observed under some circumstances.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Neither the amount of DNA nor the completeness of the DNA profile is a reliable guide as to whether the DNA arrived by primary transfer or secondary transfer. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Joe Minor and <a href="http://www.ryanforensicdna.com/dna-related_articles" target="_blank">Suzanna Ryan</a> have written several well-researched and readable articles that cover the subjects of DNA found on touched objects and secondary transfer.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Review articles by Van Oorshot and colleagues and by Meakin and Jamieson in academic forensic journals may be consulted for more detailed information.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Shedding and transferring DNA is perhaps more common than the general public appreciates.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Leslie Prey </span><a href="http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/legislative-landmarks-of-forensics-california-v-greenwood-776"><span style="font-family: Times;">wrote</span></a><span style="font-family: Times;">, "We all shed DNA, leaving traces of our identity practically everywhere we go. Forensic scientists use DNA left behind on cigarette butts, phones, handles, keyboards, cups, and numerous other objects, not to mention the genetic content found in drops of bodily fluid, like blood and semen (Van Oorschot &amp; Jones, 1997)." <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>The issues of shedding and transferring DNA were perhaps not very important when DNA profiling was in its infancy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However, the introduction of techniques based on the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) meant that much smaller amounts of DNA are needed now than in the first generation of DNA profiling.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This is because the DNA is increased in amount (amplified) many times over prior to the analysis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The more recent development of low copy number DNA profiling means that still smaller amounts of DNA can be typed, less than a dozen cells.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Although secondary transfer from the waste in the trashcan is highly plausible, primary or secondary transfer via the players themselves is also possible. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Joe Minor <a href="http://www.forensicmag.com/articles/2013/04/touch-dna-crime-scene-crime-laboratory" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “On one occasion, I swabbed my own hand after handshakes at a social function to determine the presence of other epithelial cells. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>The laboratory was able to obtain a mixture of my DNA as well as two other individuals.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Suzanna Ryan <a href="http://www.ryanforensicdna.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/October_2014_Newsletter.300125308.pdf" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “One study performed by Lowe, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">et al.,</i> was designed to highlight a ‘worst case’ scenario and involved two individuals. The first was determined to be a poor shedder and the second a good shedder. These two shook hands for one minute. The poor shedder had washed their hands immediately prior to the experiment whereas the good shedder had not. After shaking hands the poor shedder held a sterile plastic tube for 10 seconds. The tube was then swabbed and tested for the presence of DNA. This experiment was performed on two sets of good shedder/poor shedder pairs. Surprisingly, in one of the pairs, only the good shedder's DNA was obtained from the plastic tube, with no evidence of a mixture including the poor shedder!” <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Results from Vecchiotti’s laboratory published in 2014 are consistent with this result.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Suppose that David Evans shook hands with Ms. Mangum when she arrived. That or a number of other events, such as handling money, might also transfer DNA. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>As a team captain and resident of the house, Mr. Evans might have shaken hands with Ms. Mangum when she entered or touched money that she later handled.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">As persuasive as these arguments are however, one even more powerful argument may also be offered in Mr. Evans’ defense using&nbsp;the tables that Professor Giannelli presented in the chapter “DNA Profiling” within the book <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Race to Injustice</i>. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>At least two other males contributed DNA to the sample (not lacrosse players nor other men who attended the party).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In the YSTR profile ten of sixteen loci (locations within the Y chromosome) show the presence of three contributors and two more loci show the presence of at least two contributors.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In the autosomal profile some loci (places within other chromosomes) clearly show that at least three individuals contributed DNA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This is very problematic for the prosecution.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">If one acknowledges that this DNA arrived in a way unrelated to a sexual assault, then how is it possible to exclude the possibility that Mr. Evans’s DNA also arrived innocently</i>?<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">By itself, the presence of what may be Mr. Evans’ DNA on the fingernails seems inculpatory; in the context of the other profiles and given the strong possibility of secondary transfer by multiple mechanisms, it is close to meaningless as evidence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Paul Giannelli summed up the DNA on the plastic fingernails: “There was some probative value--but not much.” <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span></i>Followers of the Knox-Sollecito case will recognize that the presence of additional male DNA donors is basically the same situation that exists with Mr. Sollecito’s Y-chromosomal profile that is associated with the bra clasp.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The Gary <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2014/12/gary-leiterman-and-dna-contamination.html" target="_blank">Leiterman</a> case is perhaps the starkest example of this conundrum for the prosecution; the additional profile belongs to someone who could not possibly have been present at the crime scene.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Two more issues deserve attention, one of which is the difference in how the SBI versus DNA security interpreted the mixture in the autosomal DNA profile.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Taylor and Johnson wrote (<i>Until Proven Innocent</i>, p, 221), “The SBI had reported to Nifong that there were ‘multiple contributors’ to the DNA mixture but that ‘no conclusion [could] be rendered’ as to whether any of this fingernail DNA was even a possible partial match with any of the players…Based on the same testing process that had led the state lab to find no basis for any conclusion at all, DNA Security offered a singularly weak conclusion: that 98% of the male population could be ‘excluded as a contributor to the mixture’ and that David Evans was in the other 2 percent.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Section 21C of the motion to compel discovery also quotes the same portion of the SBI report, and footnote 70 emphasized that the SBI had said “that no conclusion ‘could be rendered as to the contribution of DNA profiles from the buccal swabs of the suspects’ in the minor profile BS 4522.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The defense was rightly concerned about this apparent discrepancy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>It is possible that DNA Security used a suspect-centered analysis, meaning that they analyzed the mixture with Evans’s reference profile in hand.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However in “Painting the target around the matching profile: the Texas sharpshooter fallacy in forensic DNA interpretation,” William Thompson observed, “In the absence of clear standards for ‘inclusion’ and ‘exclusion’, different experts evaluating the same evidence may reach different conclusions: one may conclude that a particular suspect is ‘included’, while another concludes that the same suspect is ‘excluded’.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Indeed, <a href="http://www.economist.com/node/21543121" target="_blank">Dror and Hampikian</a> have shown that the same mixed DNA profile may be interpreted differently by different groups of analysts.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Unfortunately the interpretation of DNA mixtures is presently still a somewhat subjective process; therefore, the difference between the two labs may have an innocent explanation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However, another take-home message from this case is that the defense should re-analyze DNA mixtures from items of evidence.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Finally, Dr. Meehan’s own DNA may have contaminated an item of evidence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Such contamination events are not uncommon.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The ABA’s <a href="http://www.americanbar.org/publications/criminal_justice_section_archive/crimjust_standards_dnaevidence.html" target="_blank">standard</a> 4.1a states in part:<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">“(ix) reports of laboratory contamination and other laboratory problems affecting testing procedures or results relevant to the evaluation of the procedures and test results obtained in the case and corrective actions taken in response…”<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">If there were a contamination event, Dr. Meehan’s laboratory should have reported it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However, laboratories do not always do so.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In the Adam Scott and Gary Leiterman cases, the laboratories simply ignored evidence of DNA contamination in the negative controls (negative controls are experiments which should have no DNA in them).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>There are also instances in which negative controls were faked in some way, as<a href="http://www.bioforensics.com/download-articles/" target="_blank"> noted</a> by William Thompson in “Tarnish on the gold standard.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The reasons to fake having performed the negative controls include covering up a contamination event and increasing laboratory throughput.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Given the existence of DNA contamination and of instances of samples being mixed up or mislabeled in some way, it is surprising and disappointing that anyone opposes complete disclosure of the raw data, contamination logs, standard operating procedures, and any other pertinent records.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Times;">The DNA evidence released in the fall<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">On 27 October 2006 Nifong released some 1800 pages of material to the defense, but still did not include a complete report.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Although he lacked training in this area, defense attorney Brad Bannon did an extensive study of the material and was able to glean the essential information that the Y- chromosomal DNA of four unidentified men (men who were not at the party or Mangum’s boyfriend) had been found in the items of evidence from the rape kit.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>When this information become public knowledge, it was a major turning point in the case, one that helped to shift public opinion in favor of the three accused students.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">These profiles are important for at least three reasons.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>One is that the finding of DNA serves as evidence that the tests were working, in other words the results functioned as a positive control.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The technique of amplifying DNA using the polymerase chain reaction (which is central to modern profiling) is susceptible to inhibitors of DNA polymerase, the enzyme that copies the DNA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The lack of a DNA profile might in principle, arise from the presence of inhibitors, as opposed to the absence of DNA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Of course, it is likely that the lab ran positive controls, but this sort of information might not come to light unless a DNA expert had reviewed the case for the defense.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Two is that Ms. Mangum’s sexual activity provides an explanation for the edema noted in her examination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Three is that Ms. Mangum had claimed no sexual activity for a week, and these results raised doubts about her credibility, which would have been a central issue if the case had come to trial.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Using the information that they had obtained a month and a half earlier, the defense teams jointly crafted a <a href="http://abclocal.go.com/images/wtvd/pdf/121306_DUKECASE.pdf" target="_blank">motion</a> to compel discovery and filed it on 13 December 2006.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Besides the information gleaned above, the defense teams learned that DNA Security had tested more items than it had disclosed in its report:<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: .25in; margin-right: .25in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-family: Times;">There are significant gaps in the item sequence numbers…The worksheet shows that the DNA extraction was performed n July 12, 2006, on that item, as well as items labeled “16074C” and “16075C,” which are nowhere otherwise identified in the DNA Security materials.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>But on this worksheet itself, under the “name” column, someone typed “Bobby” and “Owen.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>“Quantification Worksheet Q-181”<sup>75</sup> and “PCR Worksheet Number A-464”<sup>76</sup> reflect quantification &amp; amplification work on those three extractions the following day, July 14, 2006.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>“Analysis Worksheet Number G-592” reflects analysis of those extractions the following day, July 14, 2006.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>But nowhere in the materials do the DNA profiles generated from those analyses appear.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The phenomenon repeats itself throughout the underlying materials from DNA security.<sup>77</sup><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: .25in; tab-stops: 6.5in;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: .25in; tab-stops: 6.5in;"><span style="font-family: Times;">Students of the Knox/Sollecito case are familiar with this kind of <a href="http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/prosecutions-massive-suppression-lab-data-violation-defendants-human-rights/" target="_blank">withholding</a> of evidence, except on a larger scale; there are many samples for which DNA quantification was performed but for which no electropherogram (loosely speaking, an electropherogram is a picture of the sizes of the DNA fragments) was produced.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: .25in; tab-stops: 6.5in;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: .25in; tab-stops: 6.5in;"><span style="font-family: Times;">DNA Security’s standard operating procedures with respect to its reports were shown to be in marked contrast with its conduct in this case.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">52.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Included in the materials provided to the Defendants from DNA Security are the laboratory’s standard operating procedures, which include guidelines for drafting “Reports and Documentation” of analyses performed by the lab in each case:<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Times;">Reports shall include:<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-family: Times;">Case identifier.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-family: Times;">Description of evidence examined.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-family: Times;">Description of methodology.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-family: Times;">Name of each DNA locus analyzed.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-family: Times;">Results for each DNA test.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l2 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">·<span style="font: 7.0pt &quot;Times New Roman&quot;;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-family: Times;">Interpretative statement of conclusions…<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">That the results for each test should be part of the report is very clear.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Yet Dr. Meehan chose to disregard this standard for reasons that are open to speculation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Perhaps he acted as he did because he wished to establish a business relationship with the office of the district attorney or because of the publicity that working on a high-profile case would bring his firm.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The defense motion also noted, “the troubling effect of its limited scope of reporting is that it allowed DNA security to produce a report in this case that avoided disclosure of exculpatory evidence, either in the form of potential contamination noted in its testing, or as it relates to the discovery of DNA from multiple male sources…”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>It is difficult to overstate how different the actual results are from the results as portrayed in the incomplete report from DNA Security produced on 12 May 2006.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Times;">DNA laboratory reports and the discovery of DNA evidence<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The American Bar Association’s model rules make several important points regarding <a href="http://www.americanbar.org/publications/criminal_justice_section_archive/crimjust_standards_dnaevidence.html" target="_blank">DNA evidence</a>, one of which also insists that the reports be complete.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Standard 3.3a states, “(a) A summary of all DNA testing and data interpretation should be recorded promptly in a report.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Standard 4.1a states in part, “(xi) material or information within the prosecutor’s possession or control, including laboratory information or material, that would tend to negate the guilt of the defendant or reduce the punishment of the defendant.”<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><span style="font-family: Times;">Robert Mosteller <a href="http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2486&amp;context=faculty_scholarship" target="_blank">discussed</a> Nifong’s transgressions: </span>“Nifong had an ethical duty under Rule 3.8(d) to provide the exculpatory information in a timely fashion, which is not explained further by the rule, but lacks any suggestion that prolonged unjustified delay is authorized.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Kenneth Williams concurred, writing, “By withholding exculpatory evidence from the defense, Nifong violated the U.S. Constitution, the laws of North Carolina, and Rule 3.8d of the North Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Specifically, the State Bar found that ‘Nifong did not make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information known to him that tended to negate the guilt of the accused’ and that he ‘failed to make a reasonably diligent effort to comply with a legally proper discovery request.’”<br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times;">Professor Paul Giannelli commented on the incomplete laboratory reports, “<i>In any event, no attorney should have to search through the haystack for the exculpatory needle.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A laboratory report should be comprehensive and include a section specifying the limitations of the technique used in the analysis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The report should also be comprehensible to laypersons.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;(emphasis mine) &nbsp;</span>Professor Giannelli noted that Dr. Brian Meehan also failed to meet the standards for reports laid out by the American Society of Crime Directors/Laboratory Accreditation, even though his laboratory relied upon this organization for accreditation.<o:p></o:p></span><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Times;">Conclusions<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The circumstances surrounding the absence of evidence coupled with the presence of DNA from other men is persuasive evidence of absence; no one who attended the party sexually assaulted Ms. Mangum. &nbsp;The DNA that may be from David Evans on the plastic fingernailsis very weak evidence against him; <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">in isolation</i> it would raise the possibility of his participation in a sexual assault.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However, there are plausible alternative explanations for how his DNA arrived; therefore, if this were the only piece of evidence in the case, it would not come anywhere close to the threshold of reasonable doubt.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In the context of the absence of Mr. Evans DNA in the rape kit and the presence of other men’s DNA on the plastic fingernails, it loses almost all significance.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Regrettably, the withholding of evidence is a common theme in miscarriages of justice; however, two factors were not in Mr. Nifong’s favor. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>In addition to North Carolina’s open discovery law, the defense would also have been helped by the norms of discovery of DNA evidence as set forth in the ABA standards, which would have allowed expert review of the data in its raw form.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Without any discovery of the exculpatory DNA evidence, the case might have played out much differently, especially if Mr. Nifong had been able to escape censure.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If Mr. Nifong had brought the case to trial, it is difficult to predict<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8731849270338485723" name="_GoBack"></a>&nbsp;how a jury would weigh the fingernail DNA evidence against potential alibi witnesses for Mr. Evans (Mr. Finnerty and Mr. Seligman had electronic alibis).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Juries have occasionally ignored strong alibi evidence in favor of weak or questionable evidence, as in the cases of <a href="http://justicedenied.org/wordpress/archives/2748" target="_blank">Jonathan Fleming</a> and <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/video/dateline/54680823" target="_blank">Russ Faria</a>. &nbsp;Fortunately, the state's investigators came to the conclusion that Mr. Nifong should have, and Attorney general Roy Cooper ended the matter.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times;"><b>Update 5/18/2015</b></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times;">When Brad Bannon was preparing to defend David Evans, he read John Butler's textbook on DNA profiling. &nbsp;His cross-examination of Dr. Brian Meehan was one of the pivotal moments of the case. &nbsp;For the newest edition of his three-volume textbook Dr. Butler asked Mr. Bannon to comment on aspects of how a defense attorney would challenge DNA evidence. &nbsp;Mr. Bannon replied in part, "Did the lab follow acceptable standards of DNA analysis? &nbsp;Did it follow its own protocols? &nbsp;Is the lab applying those&nbsp;standards and protocols consistently or selectively? &nbsp;For example, why do you call a peak below 150 RFU as a true allele for one purpose, or in one case, but not for another? &nbsp;If there are such internal inconsistencies, do they usually inure to the benefit of one side's&nbsp;</span>theory of the case? &nbsp;If so, is that evidence of bias?"<br /><br />Mr. Bannon's point about consistency of threshold values for peaks is similar to one found in the textbook <i>An Introduction to Forensic DNA analysis</i>, 2nd ed. (Rudin, N. and Inman, K., CRC Press 2002, p. 121) states, “It is important to have some predetermined limit to distinguish what is signal and what is noise.” &nbsp;Without a clear guideline, a scientist may make choices that benefit his or her preferred hypothesis, even subconsciously.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Times;">A partial list of authors and references<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span><span style="font-family: Times;">William Anderson “Duke:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Why the DNA mattered.” &nbsp;</span>William Anderson teaches economics at Frostburg State University in Maryland.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>He was one of the first bloggers to call attention to the many problems in the Duke lacrosse case.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">William Cohan, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Price of Silence</i>, Scribner, 2014.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Mr. Cohan is a writer on business affairs.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Paul Giannelli, “DNA Profiling” in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Race to Injustice</i>(2009), Michael Siegel, ed.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Paul Giannelli is Albert J. Weatherhead III and Richard W. Weatherhead Professor of Law at Case Western University in Ohio.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span></span><span style="font-family: Times;">He was the Reporter for the American Bar Association Criminal Justice Standards on DNA evidence, and he specializes in the area of scientific evidence. &nbsp;<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">William Thompson explained, "</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 16px;">The Reporter for an ABA Standards Group or Study Committee is the person whose job it is to take down and 'report' the findings, conclusions and determinations of the group or committee.</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 16px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 16px;">It is the reporter who prepares the first draft of the report and of the annotations and notes that accompany a report.</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 16px;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 16px;">The Reporter usually works under the direction of a committee chair, but has independent responsibility for getting details right."</span></div><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:DocumentProperties> <o:Template>Normal.dotm</o:Template> <o:Revision>0</o:Revision> <o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime> <o:Pages>1</o:Pages> <o:Words>63</o:Words> <o:Characters>362</o:Characters> <o:Company>UNCW</o:Company> <o:Lines>3</o:Lines> <o:Paragraphs>1</o:Paragraphs> <o:CharactersWithSpaces>444</o:CharactersWithSpaces> <o:Version>12.0</o:Version> </o:DocumentProperties> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG/> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing> <w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing> <w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery> <w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/> <w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/> </w:Compatibility> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="276"> </w:LatentStyles></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 10]><style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style><![endif]--> <!--StartFragment--><!--EndFragment--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Peter Gill, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Misleading DNA Evidence</i>, Academic Press, 2014.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Peter Gill is Professor of Forensic Genetics at The University of Oslo, Norway and is a professor at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>He is chair of the DNA commission of the International Society of Forensic Genetics, and he has published more than 180 peer-reviewed papers.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Georgina Meakin and Alan Jamieson, “DNA transfer: Review and implications for casework,” Forensic Science International: Genetics 7 (2013) 434–443.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Professor Jamieson is the head of the Forensic Institute in Glasgow, Scotland.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div>Robert P. Mosteller, Exculpatory Evidence, Ethics, and the Road to the Disbarment of Mike Nifong: The Critical Importance of Full Open-File Discovery, 15 <i>George Mason Law Review</i> 257-318 (2008).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Robert Mosteller is J. Dickson Phillips Distinguished Professor of Law at The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>He teaches Evidence, Criminal Procedure Investigation, Constitutional Criminal Procedure and co-directs the Trial Advocacy Program.<br /><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Joe Minor, “<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Touch DNA: From the Crime Scene to the Crime Laboratory,” Forensic Magazine 4/12/13. &nbsp;</span></span>Joe Minor teaches forensic science and is a forensic DNA consultant.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Suzanna Ryan “<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Touch DNA Analysis: Using The Literature To Help Answer Some Common Questions.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Forensic Magazine. &nbsp;</span></span><a href="http://www.ryanforensicdna.com/dna-related_articles" target="_blank">Suzanna Ryan</a> is a contributor to law enforcement and forensic magazines, and she is a consultant and expert witness.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Until Proven Innocent</i>, St. Martin’s Press, 2007.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">KC Johnson hosted <a href="http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">Durham in Wonderland</a>, a blog that was a major source of information related to the case</span>.<span style="font-family: Times;"> <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Stuart Taylor is a freelance journalist and a contributing editor for the National Journal, specializing in law.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>He is a nonresident fellow of the Brookings Institution.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">William Thompson, Painting the target around the matching profile: the Texas sharpshooter fallacy in forensic DNA interpretation.” </span><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Times;">Law, Probability and Risk (2009) 8, 257-276.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times; mso-bidi-font-family: Times;">William Thompson, “Tarnish on the Gold Standard.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>William Thompson is a professor in the Department of Criminology, Law and Society at the University of California, Irvine.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>His areas of expertise include forensics and human judgment and decision-making.</span><span style="font-family: Times;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Van Oorshot R.A., Ballantyne, K.N., and Mitchell, R.J.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>“Forensic trace DNA:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>a review.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Investigative Genetics 1 (2010) 1:14. doi: 10.1186/2041-2223-1-14.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Roland Van Oorshot is a member of the Forensic Services Department of the Victoria Police, Victoria, Australia.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Kenneth Williams “An Examination of the District Attorney’s Alleged Unethical Conduct,” in <u>Race</u><u>to</u> <u>Injustice</u> (2009), Michael Siegel, ed.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Kenneth Williams is a member of the faculty of the South Texas College of Law in Houston, TX.<o:p></o:p></span></div><!--EndFragment-->Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-47308053649104334322014-12-02T23:19:00.000-05:002015-05-18T21:02:50.783-04:00Gary Leiterman and DNA contamination<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:DocumentProperties> <o:Template>Normal.dotm</o:Template> <o:Revision>0</o:Revision> <o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime> <o:Pages>1</o:Pages> <o:Words>1092</o:Words> <o:Characters>6228</o:Characters> <o:Company>UNCW</o:Company> <o:Lines>51</o:Lines> <o:Paragraphs>12</o:Paragraphs> <o:CharactersWithSpaces>7648</o:CharactersWithSpaces> <o:Version>12.0</o:Version> </o:DocumentProperties> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG/> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing> <w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing> <w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery> <w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/> <w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/> </w:Compatibility> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="276"> </w:LatentStyles></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 10]><style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style><![endif]--> <!--StartFragment--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">Jane Mixer was initially thought to be the victim of a possible serial killer, John Norman Collins.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Jane Mixer was murdered in 1969 near Ann Arbor, MI, but the DNA testing was done until 2002, a gap of approximately 33 years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>One item of evidence from the Mixer case showed DNA from John Ruelas, and several locations (on some panty hose and a towel) showed DNA from Gary Leiterman.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Despite the fact that the state had no other evidence against Leiterman, he was convicted of her murder in 2005.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>John Ruelas was never charged.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">A drop of blood from Mixer’s hand was preserved, and DNA from John Ruelas was found.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The prosecutor believed that the blood was from John Ruelas, but he did not offer a satisfactory explanation of how his blood came to be there.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Because Ruelas was four years old at the time of the murder and lived about forty miles away, the possibility that his DNA arrived instead via contamination must be considered.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>As defense expert witness Theodore Kessis wrote, “The unexpected and never accounted for finding of John Ruelas’ profile on evidence in the Mixer case clearly demonstrates the proposition that contamination can and does occur between samples from different cases.”<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">The presence of Ruelas’ DNA is most easily explained by the fact that samples from John Ruelas were also processed in the crime laboratory of the State Police of Michigan<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8731849270338485723" name="_GoBack"></a>&nbsp;contemporaneously with the samples from the Mixer murder.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>But can the absence of Mixer’s DNA in the blood drop also be explained?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In 2004 C. Peel and P. Gill (“Attribution of DNA profiles to body fluid stains,” International Congress Series 1261, pp. 53-55) performed a series of experiments, in which a good DNA shedder handled the substrate (cotton or glass) for a blood stain, either before or after the blood from a different individual was placed on the substrate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The blood was either diluted or the stain had been left to sit for some months, allowing for possible DNA degradation over time.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>They used leucomalachite green as a presumptive test for blood.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; Peel and Gill</span>&nbsp;wrote, “…the more dilute or degraded the stain, the higher the contribution of the substrate handler’s DNA to the resulting profile.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A positive <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-sensitivities-of-presumptive-and.html" target="_blank">presumptive</a> test could be obtained from samples when a profile originating from the body fluid was no longer detectable.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Although it is tempting to associate the DNA that one finds in a stain to that stain, such an association is occasionally in error.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In some cases substrate controls can be helpful in determining whether or not DNA is associated with a particular stain.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">It is essentially 100% certain that Ruelas’s DNA arrived on the items from the Mixer case via contamination, although the exact route is unclear.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>Gary Leiterman’s DNA was also in the laboratory at that time. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>No body fluid could be associated with Leiterman’s DNA associated with evidence from the Mixer case.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Sub-source DNA such as this is weaker in probative value than DNA associated with a particular tissue or body fluid. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Taking these facts and ideas into consideration, Leiterman’s DNA probably also arrived via contamination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">A second line of evidence also implies that contamination is the most likely explanation. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>A lab worker performed a negative control experiment during the time that a sample from the panty hose was being tested. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>The negative controls will only show the presence of DNA in an electropherogram if DNA has been introduced unexpectedly into the experiment. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Theodore Kessis <a href="http://www.garyisinnocent.org/web/CaseHistory/NewDNAFindings/tabid/58/Default.aspx" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “Review of the electropherograms associated with this negative control sample (NEG 041902) reveals that it was contaminated, a fact that cannot be disputed since Dr. Milligan himself labeled it with a note indicated as much (Appendix 8 – Electropherogram sample NEG 041902).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Remarkably, Dr. Milligan stated in his 7/15/02 testimony that no contamination events had occurred during the course of his testing and that if any had, he would have documented them in his reporters (p. 141-21 and 142-4).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Equally difficult to rectify here is the fact that when asked if he had ever committed an error, Dr. Milligan’s replied that he could never recall making one.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>CBS News <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/deadly-ride/6/" target="_blank">reported</a> that, “Lab supervisor Jeffrey Nye says he retraced every step and he does not believe there is any issue of contamination. ‘No issue whatsoever,’ he says.” &nbsp;This is an astonishing statement.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: .5in;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 18px;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">This lack of disclosure of a contamination event and a similar occurrence in the Adam Scott case (Peter Gill, <i>Misleading DNA Evidence</i>, Academic Press, 2014, p. 22) demonstrates that one cannot implicitly rely upon a laboratory to report accurately the results of negative control reactions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Yet this is valuable information; a jury might choose to discount testimony from a lab if it knew contamination had happened.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>It is also worth recalling what William Thompson noted in “Tarnish on the Gold Standard,” which is that the some laboratory workers tamper with negative controls in various ways.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>For these reasons full disclosure of the negative controls in the form of raw (meaning unprocessed) data is the best course of action for a judicial system.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Students of the Knox/Sollecito case will not be surprised to learn that the position of the Michigan State Police crime laboratory was foursquare <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">against</i> disclosure of the raw data.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Professor Thompson <a href="http://www.bioforensics.com/download-articles/" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “The Deputy Director of the Michigan State Police issued a statement on May 12, 2005 opposing ‘the allowance of releasing raw electronic data for subsequent manipulations using software and parameters not validated by the Michigan State Police Forensic Laboratory’ and declaring that ‘it is the position of the Michigan State Police Forensic Science Division that any release of this (sic) data for processing with non-validated parameters is tantamount to evidence tampering.’”<sup>26</sup><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This is a self-evidently nonsensical position, and it also forces one to ask why the processing parameters chosen by a forensic laboratory are necessarily the optimal ones.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;"><b>Conclusions</b><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt;">The DNA evidence against Gary Leiterman is compromised so completely by the presence of the DNA from John Ruelas that it scarcely should be called evidence at all. &nbsp;Exactly how their DNA came to be on items of evidence from the murder of Jane Mixer is not known.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;&nbsp;</span>Dr. Theodore Kessis <a href="http://www.freebennow.org/kessisletter.pdf">commented</a> on the Benjamin LaGuer case:&nbsp; “It is highly improbable that any given forensic DNA laboratory will take it upon itself to contact its accrediting bodies or the press and state for the record how often they make mistakes… To best understand the weaknesses associated with DNA testing we must rely upon the empirical, the occasions in which such deficiencies are revealed either by the press or internal review of a lab’s documentation of such problems by a defense expert. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>A close look at either reveals that indeed many instances of DNA testing errors have lead to the false conviction of individuals.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Regrettably, even the sworn testimony of laboratory personnel may be seriously in error, as in the Leiterman case.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Nor can a jury be counted upon to accurately weigh the odds of contamination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>Quite the contrary, juries sometimes discount alibi evidence, such as the Farah Jama case, or the fact that the defendant lived in one city and claimed never having been to the city where the crime occurred, as happened in the Adam Scott case. &nbsp;Both cases are now generally believed to be instances of DNA contamination.<o:p></o:p></span></div><!--EndFragment-->Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-40114255093955808632014-07-20T18:03:00.001-04:002014-08-13T21:00:11.376-04:00Retesting the knife for DNA: a dubious rationale, but an exculpatory result<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG/> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:DoNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>JA</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> <w:UseFELayout/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true" DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99" LatentStyleCount="276"> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/> </w:LatentStyles></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 10]><style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";} </style><![endif]--> <!--StartFragment--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Part 38 in the Knox/Sollecito case</b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Background on the DNA profiling of Sample 36-I</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">In overturning the Hellmann-Zanetti acquittal of Knox and Sollecito, the Supreme Court of Cassation (SCC) published a motivations document in 2013 (the <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-italian-supreme-courts-dangerously.html" target="_blank">previous</a> blog entry critiqued section 12 of the motivations report on genetic investigations).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The present entry discusses section 11, another DNA-related portion but one that focused entirely on the retest of Raffaele’s kitchen knife, the subject of two previous <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/01/amanda-knox-and-raffaele-sollecito-and.html" target="_blank">entries</a> <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/02/ordinary-kitchen-knife-or-murder-weapon.html" target="_blank">here</a>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>One of the court-appointed independent experts, Dr. Carla Vecchiotti, had found the sample in question (36-I) by swabbing the knife in 2011.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Because this amount was far below the recommended amount of DNA for the reagent kit, she decided that the amount was too small (its concentration was estimated to be 5 pg/µL).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Pro-guilt commenters sometimes imply that because the defense had the opportunity to object to certain aspects of DNA testing in 2007, that their subsequent requests for the raw forensic data should be turned aside (this argument is problematic on multiple grounds as discussed in the <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-italian-supreme-courts-dangerously.html" target="_blank">previous</a> blog entry).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Yet if we accept that an objection to some aspect of testing should be lodged immediately, then either the prosecution's observers should have objected to not amplifying 36-I in the spring of 2011, or the prosecution should have admitted that it lost the opportunity to do so when it did not.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Why did the Supreme Court of Cassation demand an amplification of the new sample?</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">In section 11 of their motivations report the CSC <a href="http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/2013-03-25_-_Supreme_Court_Knox-Sollecito__English_by_David_Anderson_.pdf" target="_blank">wrote</a>, <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">“This trace was not subjected to genetic analysis – through a decision made by one of the experts, Professor Vecchiotti, alone, without documented prior authorization to that effect by the Court, who had also given a mandate to attribute the DNA on the present findings on the knife and on the bra hook- because the amount was not sufficient to provide a reliable result, amounting to <i>Law (</i>sic<i>) Copy</i> <i>Number</i>. This choice, however, met the subsequent sharing of the group, on the assumption that such a small sample would not have allowed two amplifications necessary for a reliable result (p. 84 of sentence).<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“So that when the Procurator General and the civil plaintiffs demanded to complete the examination, strongly as a result of the scientific contribution of Professor Novelli, geneticist of undisputable fame recognized by the same Court (p. 79 sent.) on the availability of equipment able of operate with safety also quantities of less than ten picograms, in the areas of&nbsp;diagnostic character (even on embryos) in which the claim to certainty is certainly no less pressing than that which animates the legal field, the Court rejected that proposal, assuming that the methods to which Prof. Novelli had referred were <i>"in the experimental phase” </i>(p. 84 sent.), thus freely interpreting and misrepresenting the assumption of bias, which in fact was&nbsp;to remember the use of these diagnostic methods in areas in which you can be certain of the result.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“…Especially since the renewal of genetic investigations were requested in 2011, after four years from the initial time and over which the evolution of instrumentation and methods of investigation had marked significant milestones, as was emphasised by the advisor to the Procurator General, Professor Novelli. Just on receipt of the information from the consultant mentioned who - under the constraint of the obligation to truth, spoke of cutting-edge techniques -, the Court fell into a new gross misrepresentation of argument concerning the reliability of the results of investigations carried out assuming no new findings of such remedies, even through developments emerging at a later time, concerning reasonableness of the grounds (Section I, 25.6 .2007, n. 24667).<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“…[the survey must] bring to analysis also the newly sampled trace, according to the most accurate and modern “experimental” analytical techniques, under pain of violation of the law for not making a decisive test and the fallout in terms of manifest illogical reasoning (again for obvious incompleteness of the inferential platform, to have overlooked data that is not only important, but crucial), as was correctly pointed out by the public plaintiff.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Leila Schneps and Coralie Colmez summarized Novelli’s testimony and offered their opinion in the chapter, “The test that wasn’t done,” in their 2013 book <u>Math on Trial</u> (pp. 83-86):<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>"In court on September 5 [2011] and supported by expert prosecution witness Giuseppe <span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Novelli</span>, Stefanoni explained that newer generations of DNA analysis kits existed in 2011 that had not been available in 2007, and these new kits could give results on as small as a couple of cells.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>She wanted a new analysis performed to confirm that her previous work was correct.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The prosecution agreed and asked the judge to order the new tests...Judge Hellmann missed a major opportunity to get at the truth.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>According to the CSC, techniques that are appropriate for diagnosis in embryology are also appropriate for forensic investigations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>There have been advances in technology, and the new tests should take advantage of them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The results will be "decisive."<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Not every observer sounded convinced of the probability-based rationale Schneps and Colmez put forward.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Professor Daniel H <a href="http://for-sci-law-now.blogspot.com/2013/05/bad-math-or-passable-law-dna-testing-in.html" target="_blank">Kaye</a> <a href="http://for-sci-law-now.blogspot.com/2013/03/are-two-heads-better-than-one.html" target="_blank">wrote,</a> “If these experts’ concern — that the original DNA test was simply detecting traces of Kercher's and Sollecito’s DNA that investigators inadvertently transferred to the knife and bra clasp, respectively — then repeating the tests could well continue to detect that DNA — and prove nothing more than the original tests did.” In other words one weakness in the rationale provided by the SCC is that a newer generation of kits cannot circumvent the problem that one is dealing with DNA in the low template range (see below).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><o:p></o:p></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Can one equate pre-implantation genetic diagnosis with DNA forensics?</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">It may be that Professor Novelli left the court with the impression that single-cell PCR was new technology, but single-cell PCR in diagnostics is at least twenty years old.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Yet the problem with using diagnostic practices to justify further low template testing on the knife is that it ignores that one is still dealing with low template quantities and all the problems that such analysis has <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">in a forensic setting</i>.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In the article “LCN DNA Analysis: Limitations Prevent 'General Acceptance'” Dr. Angela von Daal <a href="http://www.promega.com/resources/profiles-in-dna/lcn-dna-analysis-limitations-prevent-general-acceptance/?origUrl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.promega.co.uk%2fresources%2fprofiles-in-dna%2flcn-dna-analysis-limitations-prevent-general-acceptance%2f">wrote</a>, "The use of PCR for analysis of very low levels of DNA in the field of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) has been used to justify general acceptance of LCN analysis in the wider scientific community(12). This argument is flawed. PGD analysis is not analogous to LCN analysis for several reasons. PGD uses pristine cellular DNA from a single source, whereas forensic LCN samples are mostly mixtures and are likely in a state of apoptosis. The complexities of profile interpretation issues seen with STR analysis (e.g., stutter) are not an issue for PGD testing(13). However the most significant difference is that the samples derived from the mother, father and embryo are single-source and the parental samples are of known genotype."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In other words the connection between pre-implantation genetic diagnosis and low template DNA forensics is tenuous and trying to extrapolate from the former to the latter is dubious at best.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Why Professor Novelli chose to ignore the problems in his analogy is something only he can explain.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Did the SCC understand the unique problems of low template DNA profiling?</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">And the problems of innocent transfer of DNA get more severe as the sample size gets smaller.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Sara Gino testified for the defense in the trial of the first instance, and some of what she had to say is pertinent to this issue. From the Massei report (p. 258, English translation): “She reaffirmed that [the risk of] contamination exists, and emphasised that in minimal quantities of DNA there is not necessarily a greater risk of contamination but it was easier to notice the effects of the contamination and be misled (‘...It's not that the risk of contamination is greater; but it is easier to see the contamination...’ page 92).” In response to a question on this subject, Professor Dan Krane expounded on Sarah Gino’s testimony, “There is absolutely no question but that contamination is a much greater problem in LCN cases than conventional DNA testing. The reasons that it is a greater problem are both because it is easier to detect contaminants ([Sarah] Gino's point) and because it is easier to transfer (and to transfer without knowing) smaller amounts of DNA than larger amounts of DNA.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Proper low template profiling demands that one rework the entire process of DNA forensics, from collection of the evidence all the way through the final step of analysis of the electropherogram.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>True low copy number LCN profiling requires ultra-clean, dedicated facilities in order to perform it properly, as clearly discussed in nontechnical language in an <a href="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&amp;objectid=10408000" target="_blank">article</a> in the New Zealand Herald. Without those extra precautions, the odds of contamination are necessarily greater (or else the precautions are a waste of time and money).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In a review article in Nanomedicine Professor Novelli and coauthors wrote, “<span style="font-family: Times;">Very few laboratories perform low template DNA typing properly, because it requires dedicated facilities and great experience<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">,</b>although there are several published methods for the interpretation of such profiles [80-82].”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This blog has previously discussed the need for proper air handling facilities.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Even so, within the forensic DNA community there are a number of critics of LCN profiling.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Dr. Budowle and colleagues, for example, argued that low template analysis should be restricted to identification of bodies and the generation of leads.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In other words using the practices in embryology to justify further testing on the knife was predicated on a very weak analogy and one that has been seriously questioned by molecular biologists.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Professor Novelli should have known this and should have acknowledged this limitation to the court.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>What other forensic issues did the Supreme Court of Cassation ignore?</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">In forensics it is impossible to interrogate the DNA as to the time or manner of its deposition.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>With respect to the knife, the DNA may have arrived from secondary or tertiary transfer prior to its collection or during its handling.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Regrettably, the knife was removed from its package at the police station, a breach of good practice.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; T</span>he person who repackaged it had previously been to the women’s apartment earlier that day, a second error. &nbsp;In addition, the negative controls have never been produced in the form of raw data or probably any other form.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>What did the proponents of the retest expect to learn?</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">As this blog has repeatedly argued, the DNA from Sample 36B in 2007 was probably from laboratory contamination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Pro-guilt commenters have resisted this interpretation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In a story from 27 April 2013 the BBC’s <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22310186" target="_blank">Ruth Alexander</a> asked Coralie Colmez this question.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>“’So what this means in the case of the knife in the murder is that if it were tested again, and once again the DNA was Meredith's profile we could be a lot more certain that the DNA on the knife is indeed Meredith's,’ Colmez says.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>On the other hand suppose that the test came out differently.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>“And if the knife were tested again and the DNA did not match Meredith Kercher's profile? That would be good news for Knox and Sollecito, she says.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">‘This would mean that this major piece of evidence against them would be discredited.’”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In other words either way the results turned out, there would be useful, arguably decisive, new information.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">What did the new test actually tell us about the knife?<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Andrea Vogt <a href="http://thefreelancedesk.com/amanda-knox-trials-meredith-kercher-case/" target="_blank">wrote</a>, "The RIS Wednesday deposited their forensic report on trace 36i, a spot of DNA identified (but not earlier tested) on the kitchen knife alleged to be the murder weapon. “Cento Percento” (100 percent) said Major Berti, discussing compatibility. The RIS found that the DNA was compatible with Amanda Knox, and excluded that it was that of Sollecito, Guede or Kercher. The RIS expert was asked only a few questions from attorneys and the judge. The judge asked why the RIS had done two amplications of the DNA and not 3 or 4. Major Berti described that two is considered the minimum number of amplifications necessary, according to today’s forensic standards, doing less (or more) might have diminished the reliability of the results. The judge also asked about the age of the equipment used. Berti responded that the forensic kit used this time has been commercialized since 2010 and available for use since 2011. At one point the judge stopped a line of questioning by Knox’s Rome attorney Carlo Dalla Vedova, who was asking why the RIS described Knox’s DNA as “fluids” when a prior expert had said the trace did not come from blood. Nencini said: That question was not put to the RIS by this court, it was not their job to determine that. The other experts’ reports are in the case files for everyone to read, he noted, adding: “We cannot put words in the mouth of this expert that were said by another expert.” <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The presence of Ms. Knox’s DNA on the handle knife has never been in dispute, and the finding of additional DNA on the blade is not inculpatory.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A recent review article on trace DNA noted that DNA transfers can occur after an item of evidence is packaged; therefore, the DNA on the blade may have arisen from transfer after the knife was packaged, or from direct transfer: chef’s knives are often gripped both at the handle and the base of the blade.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If anything, the result is modest additional exculpatory evidence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If the knife were the murder weapon, it would have Meredith’s blood.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Somehow all of Meredith’s blood would have to be removed, yet DNA from Meredith and Amanda would remain, along with starch.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A <a href="http://thefreelancedesk.com/the-secret-u-s-forensic-defense-of-amanda-knox/" target="_blank">letter</a> to the court from Professor Bruce Budowle indicates that it would be difficult to clean a knife of blood.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>There was additional DNA in sample 36-I belonging to an unknown person, a finding which further calls into question the hypothesis that it was the murder weapon.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Are the new results exculpatory?</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">In early 2014 Leila Schneps wrote, “By the third trial, when a new attempt was made to collect DNA from the knife (which had been swabbed again during the appeal trial, though no tests were then conducted) there was no match to Meredith – a result welcomed by Knox's defence team, though it did not in fact impact on the findings of the first trial.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This passage presents quite a contrast with the earlier quote from Coralie Colmez (above).<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">There are two important issues.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The first point is that Meredith Kercher’s DNA was not found, and this was the whole reason for performing the test.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The people who argued for the test did so on the basis that the retest might improve the reliability of the 2007 result.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>They should at the very minimum concede that the original result on the knife has now been “discredited,” as Ms. Colmez wrote.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The second point is that the 2013 result did indeed impact on the finding of the first trial.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The Carabinieri noted that at least two amplifications of the DNA must be done, and Stefanoni apparently did only one.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Therefore, the lack of retesting with respect to the original result is indeed makes it unreliable by the expert testimony of the Carabinieri, which support the testimony of Conti and Vecchiotti.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">In other words the result and the testimony are a one-two punch that should have knocked the kitchen knife right out of the trial.</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Is the Nencini court being impartial and objective with respect to the forensics of this case?</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">An early <a href="http://thefreelancedesk.com/amanda-knox-trials-meredith-kercher-case/" target="_blank">report</a> from Andrea Vogt on Judge Nencini’s motivations document from the Florence court indicates that Nencini harshly criticized the rationale for Conti and Vecchiotti’s not completing the test in 2011.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>For the reasons given above, this argument has no merit.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A cynical observer might conclude that it is a canard to distract future courts from the real issue, which is that Meredith Kercher’s DNA was not found, and this was supposed to be a decisive test.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Pro-guilt commenters might now argue that the test would have been decisive if Meredith’s DNA had been observed in 36-I but any other result is inconclusive.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However, such an argument prompts a question:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Why should the Nencini court order a test that might only be beneficial to the prosecution and not also grant requests that are favorable to the defense?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This blog has long argued that the failure of the prosecution to release the <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/10/american-bar-association-and-dna.html" target="_blank">raw</a> DNA data constitutes a serious breach of discovery, rendering the trial unfair.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Another serious logical problem with the SCC and the Nencini court is the selective indignation about the lack of amplification of 36-I in 2011.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Mrs. Stefanoni has failed to produce many <a href="http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/prosecutions-massive-suppression-lab-data-violation-defendants-human-rights/" target="_blank">electropherograms</a> which showed positive quantification of DNA, some of which may contain highly probative evidence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The defense has every right to see these data under any reasonable standard of discovery.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>One profoundly wishes that the Nencini court had demanded the production of the electropherograms that originated from a putative <a href="http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/batch-one-downstairs-crime-scene-semen-samples-early-exclusion-sollecito-lumumba/" target="_blank">semen</a> fraction, to take just one example.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The fact that it did not do so is only one reason to call its objectivity into question.<br /><br /><b>Update (13 August 2014)</b><br />In the Lindy Chamberlain <a href="http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/not_guilty/chamberlain2/4.html" target="_blank">case</a> a forensic worker, Joy Kuhl, invented a new test for fetal hemoglobin. &nbsp;The defense witnesses were sharply critical of her methods. &nbsp;<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #485b60;">“On the matter of specificity and testing solution, [Ian] Barker wanted to know whether [Professor Richard] Nairn believed that over two hundred tests, referring to Kuhl's tests, which showed a negative reaction to adult haemoglobin would be sufficient to conclude that the anti-sera was not specific to adult haemoglobin. Nairn answered that it would depend on the test, a bad test is a bad test no matter how many times it is repeated.” &nbsp;Another author quoted Richard Nairn:&nbsp;</span>"Two hundred <i>bad</i>tests are poorer than one <i>good</i> test."<br /> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG/> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:DoNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>JA</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> <w:UseFELayout/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="&#45;-"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true" DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99" LatentStyleCount="276"> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/> </w:LatentStyles></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 10]><style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style><![endif]--> <!--StartFragment--> <div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><!--EndFragment--> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG/> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:DoNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>JA</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> <w:UseFELayout/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="&#45;-"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true" DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99" LatentStyleCount="276"> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/> </w:LatentStyles></xml><![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 10]><style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style><![endif]--> <!--StartFragment--> <div class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: #485b60; font-family: Times; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><!--EndFragment--></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><!--EndFragment-->Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com58tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-66450728390778136892013-09-19T00:14:00.000-04:002013-11-12T22:24:19.816-05:00The Italian supreme court’s dangerously erroneous views on forensic DNA contamination<!--StartFragment--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Part 37 in the Knox/Sollecito case</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Part A:&nbsp; Errors in the principles of DNA forensics and discovery</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Italian Court of Cassation, the supreme court of Italy, released a report giving its reasons for overturning Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito's successful 2011 appeal and sending the case for another trial in Florence beginning at the end of September.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The report by the <span lang="IT" style="mso-ansi-language: IT;">Corte Suprema di Cassazione (CSC)</span> has been <a href="http://www.injustice-anywhere.org/CassazioneTranslationFull.pdf" target="_blank">translated</a> into English <a href="http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/viewtopic.php?p=141747#p141747" target="_blank">twice</a>, and a comprehensive <a href="http://wrongfulconvictionnews.com/critical-commentary-on-the-ruling-of-the-supreme-court-on-the-knox-sollecito-trial/" target="_blank">critique</a> has appeared. &nbsp;Page numbers below refer to the first translation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;&nbsp;</span>The CSC’s report made a number of highly questionable assertions or omissions with respect to DNA contamination in general and with respect to the evidence in this case:<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: 30.6pt; tab-stops: 6.5in;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">“It was also ruled out by the same experts that contamination occurred in the laboratory. Professor Novelli said that the origin, the vehicle of contamination must be demonstrated: he specified to have inspected 255 forensic sample extracts at the Polizia scientifica, had analyzed all profiles and did not see any evidence of one single contamination; he excluded absolutely persuasively that the contaminant could be present intermittently and that DNA could remain suspended, and then fall on a particular item.” (p. 67)<o:p></o:p></i></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: 30.6pt;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">“but above all it [the discourse of justification] is based on the erroneous belief that the burden of proof lies on demonstrating the absence of contamination, whereas the demonstration data that emerged from the technical advice was based on properly documented reporting activities carried out under the eyes of the consultants that had nothing to detect, in a clean laboratory environment, activities conducted according to methods tested, the results of which could certainly be called into question…”</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>(p. 69)<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i>The moment of DNA contamination is often not known</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Should a mechanism of contamination have to be demonstrated?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>One problem with this argument is that the mechanism of contamination may only be revealed years after the fact or not at all.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In the Jaidyn Leskie case (see below) it was shown that the evidence items were in the same lab closely in time, but the exact moment of contamination was elusive.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Modern forensic DNA testing relies upon the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique, which produces many copies from a small number of DNA molecules.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Dr. Donald Riley <a href="http://www.scientific.org/tutorials/articles/riley/riley.html" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “PCR is also very similar to what happens when a clinical infection occurs.&nbsp; Clinicians have known for many years that a single germ (bacterial cell or virus) contaminating a wound can produce a massive infection.&nbsp; Similarly, a DNA molecule can contaminate (infect) a PCR and become a significant problem.&nbsp; The ability of small amounts of DNA to produce false and misleading results is well-known and well-documented within the research community, where the technology originated.&nbsp; Anyone who has caught a cold from an unknown source, or who has a pollen allergy should have some sense of how easily PCRs are contaminated.&nbsp; Actually, it is probably easier to contaminate a PCR than to catch a cold since unlike our bodies, PCRs lack immune systems.&nbsp; The only protection PCRs have is the technique of the analyst, use of control samples to monitor contaminants and careful interpretation.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Dr. Riley went on to say, “<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">When <span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">contamination</span>occurs there is rarely any way to confirm how it happened.” </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>The argument that contamination must be proved suggests an analogy: that doctors should demand that the patient prove the exact moment at which he or she became infected before the doctor commences treatment.&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In his 2010 report on the Farah Jama case, Former Australian Supreme Court Judge Frank Vincent <a href="http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/home/justice+system/laws+and+regulation/criminal+law/report+on+the+conviction+of+mr+farah+abdulkadir+jama" target="_blank">wrote</a> (p. 24), “Precisely how it [contamination] may have happened cannot be determined as the deposition of the minute quantity of material involved could have occurred in a number of ways.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>It is possible to speculate about the probability of transference through various mechanisms, but ultimately pointless to do so.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Judge Vincent also wrote (p. 45), “Whilst there is no absolute bar to conviction based solely on DNA evidence, the better view is that a conviction should only be returned where there is DNA evidence <u>and</u> at least one other item of evidence present which is consistent with the guilt of the offender.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The tiny amounts of DNA involved and the ease with which DNA transfers make it very difficult to pinpoint exactly when contamination occurs.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Attorney General Rob Hulls <a href="http://archive.premier.vic.gov.au/component/content/article/10362.html" target="_blank">said</a>, “<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">Mr Jama’s case, I think, highlights the need for everyone in the criminal justice system to better understand the nature and the limitations of DNA evidence.&nbsp; The perceived value of DNA evidence means that extreme care must be taken at every stage of the process: from collection of DNA to the handling of DNA, the testing of the materials and indeed, the interpretation of the results, to the way in which the evidence is presented to juries in criminal trials.” <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i>Lack of good forensic technique</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">If the forensic police fail to follow generally accepted guidelines in collecting evidence, should the evidence be accepted?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The CSC wrote, “<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">Prof. Novelli had agreed that there are protocols and recommendations, but added that first of all the operator had to contribute his common sense (ud. 6.9.2011, p. Transcription 59.), otherwise it put in question all the DNA analysis done from 1986 onwards.</span></i><span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">”</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Does the CSC really believe that poor technique is insufficient ground for considering the evidence to be unreliable?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The laws governing forensic evidence must set the correct incentives in any criminal justice system.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If evidence collection procedures are flawed yet the evidence is accepted anyway, there is no impetus to collect it properly:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The same types of errors may convict innocent persons in other cases.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In the <a href="http://vitaliquida.blogspot.it/2010/10/via-poma-parlano-i-periti-della-difesa.html" target="_blank">Busco case</a>, Professor Novelli sounded a more cautious note than in the present one:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>“<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">According to Professor Giuseppe Novelli, <i>ordinarius</i>&nbsp;of genetics at Tor Vergata, ‘There were contaminations among items and for [=of?] the analyses on the corsage and on the bra. The chain of custody of the items did not respect national and international standards for the conservation of items.’”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>What common sense <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">actually</b> suggests is that the standards were put into place to avoid generating a misleading result and that if one violates a particular protocol there should be a solid, clearly defined reason.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The CSC provided none; on the contrary, its words are a smokescreen rather than an argument.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CSC effectively rejected the idea that the onus is on the prosecution to show that the forensic police followed correct protocols.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Not everyone agrees, at the very least.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Based upon a number of cases, a barrister in Australia argued that the prosecution must demonstrate that it has done everything correctly in a preliminary hearing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Peter Faris <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/legal-affairs/forensics-at-fault-we-need-reform-dna/story-e6frg97x-1225869367748" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “DNA should never be admitted unless there is corroboration: that is, there must be some other evidence of the identity of the offender.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>As for the rest of DNA cases, the solution is to put the burden on the prosecution.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Mr. Faris continued, “For example, the prosecution would be required to produce evidence to disprove contamination, whether at the scene or in the laboratory.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Strict proof of continuity of exhibits would be required. The prosecution would have to call evidence of the current international statistical procedures. Proof by the defence of international articles and learned writings could be relaxed.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;&nbsp;These are much more sensible guidelines than anything provided by the CSC.</span><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i>Negative controls and the importance of electronic data files</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Another serious objection to the court’s position is its belief that a witness for the prosecution need only testify that controls were run, as opposed to actually producing the negative control data in discovery.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Negative controls are runs in which template DNA is deliberately left out.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A good way to determine whether or not global contamination occurred is to examine the negative controls in the form of electronic data files, because if any DNA shows up, it must be from contamination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Among the reasons why examination of negative controls should be done using the electronic data files (EDFs), which are the raw data used to construct electropherograms is that this allows the scientist to zoom in on small peaks.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Given the smallness of some of the peaks in the bra clasp profile and of all of the peaks in the knife profile, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">negative</i> <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">controls in the form of paper copies in which the y-scale were set to two thousand RFUs for example, would be almost useless.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Even if one accepts the dubious notion that the defense bears the burden of proving contamination, then it is indefensible to prevent the defense from having access to any and all documentation that bears on this possibility, including but not limited to having the EDFs:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>It is also essential for the defense to examine the laboratory protocols, instrument logs, contamination logs and corrective action files.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Professor William Thompson <a href="http://www.bioforensics.com/conference10/Workshop/Thompson_Champion_Tarnish.pdf" target="_blank">noted</a>, “Under a guideline issued by the FBI’s DNA Advisory Board in 1998, forensic DNA laboratories are required to “follow procedures for corrective action whenever proficiency testing discrepancies and/or casework errors are detected” and “shall maintain documentation for the corrective action.[19]”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Obviously, the FBI’s rulings are not binding on laboratories in another country.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However, good forensic science, like any science, doesn’t change as one crosses a border from one country into another.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Good forensic principles, such as keeping a corrective action log, deserve to be adopted universally.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Given their importance in detecting contamination, it is not altogether surprising that negative controls themselves may be the subject of forensic fraud.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Professor Thompson <a href="http://www.bioforensics.com/conference10/Workshop/Thompson_Champion_Tarnish.pdf" target="_blank">continued</a>, “DNA analysts have recently been fired for scientific misconduct, and specifically for falsification of test results, by a number of forensic laboratories, including labs operated by the FBI,[14] Orchid-Cellmark (another large private DNA laboratory),[15] the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner in New York City,[16] and the United States Army.[17]<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In all of these cases, the analysts were caught faking the results of control samples designed to detect instances in which cross-contamination of DNA samples has occurred.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In the case of the fraud committed by Jaqueline Blake, Professor Thompson argued that if her superiors had examined the EDFs, it could have uncovered this misconduct.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CSC made much of Professor Novelli’s testimony to the effect that he found no evidence of contamination, but what criteria he used were not provided.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The CSC should state whether or not Professor Novelli used the electronic data files in his examination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">If Dr. Novelli did, then he had evidence that has been denied to the defense, which raises the very troubling question of why the prosecution and its witnesses should have access to something that was denied to the defense and its expert witnesses.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If he did not, then his review was incomplete, and it makes his claim that there was no contamination quite dubious at best.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Every DNA expert whom I have consulted or whose thoughts on the matter I have read has been unequivocal in the importance of reviewing the EDFs; that they should be released in routine discovery is a key recurring subject in this blog.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Dr. Mehul Anjaria <a href="http://forensicdnaconsulting.wordpress.com/2011/09/26/understanding-the-independent-dna-experts%E2%80%99-report-in-the-amanda-knox-case-part-2/" target="_blank">wrote</a>, "DNA analysts import ‘raw’ data from capillary electrophoresis instruments into software that assists in evaluating the DNA profiles. The DNA analyst can review peaks by zooming in and looking at height, morphology, and location to assist in determining if they should be reported as DNA alleles. The printed data can be edited by the analyst to show only the peaks being reported. Thus, it is imperative that a reviewer have access to the raw data and be able to independently evaluate the raw data in the necessary software to determine if the reported alleles are consistent with the actual data. The laboratory’s interpretation guidelines are another necessity for the review."</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Independent case reviews (including but not limited to an examination of the EDFs) turn up problems in about two thirds of all cases, <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/10/american-bar-association-and-dna.html" target="_blank">according to</a> Professor Dan Krane.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The <a href="http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/innocent-boys-jail-nightmare/story-e6frg12c-1111113259916" target="_blank">Patrick Waring</a> case in Australia is just one of many examples.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Dr. Theodore Kessis <a href="http://www.freebennow.org/kessisletter.pdf" target="_blank">commented</a> on the Benjamin LaGuer case:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>“<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">It is highly improbable that any given forensic DNA laboratory will take it upon itself to contact its accrediting bodies or the press and state for the record how often they make mistakes…</span><span style="color: black; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"> </span><span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">To best understand the weaknesses associated with DNA testing we must rely upon the empirical, the occasions in which such deficiencies are revealed either by the press or internal review of a lab’s documentation of such problems by a defense expert. A close look at either reveals that indeed many instances of DNA testing errors have lead to the false conviction of individuals.”</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-outline-level: 1;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i>Assertions from witnesses for the prosecution cannot be taken at face value</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">What should we make of Professor Novelli's claim, which the CSC accepted, of having examined hundreds of pieces of evidence and not observed evidence of contamination?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This is problematic on several grounds.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>First, it is unclear what Professor Novelli’s criteria or methods were for proving or disproving contamination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Therefore, there is a decided lack of transparency in the process.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Second, Professor Novelli did not explain the presence of multiple profiles on the clasp (see part B).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Third, if the CSC accepts the judgment of a prosecution witness over independent experts, it suggests that the court has a strongly pro-prosecution bias.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Nor can it be persuasively argued that Professor Novelli’s credentials in the area of DNA forensics are stronger than those of the independent experts, Conti and Vecchiotti.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Professor Novelli’s main research interest is in the area of medical genetics with some additional research into one specific area of forensic genetics (that of single nucleotide polymorphisms), whereas Conti and Vecchiotti have focused more narrowly on forensic genetics.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Fourth, forensic witnesses make false statements while testifying.<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span></span>The CSC accepted the prosecution’s claim that negative controls were performed, despite tacitly acknowledging that they were not part of the case file.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In his report on the Leiterman case, Dr. Theodore Kessis <a href="http://www.garyisinnocent.org/web/Portals/0/documents/KessisReport.pdf" target="_blank">highlighted</a> the fact that a negative control electropherogram showed contamination, and that Dr. Milligan labeled it as such.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Despite this, Dr. Milligan later testified that no contamination occurred and that if it had, his reports would have documented it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In “Tarnish on the Gold Standard” Professor William C. Thompson <a href="http://www.bioforensics.com/articles/" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “The DNA analysts in the Houston Police Crime lab came up with an easy solution— they simply failed to run extraction blanks (although they claimed in testimony that they had run all necessary controls).” Thus <span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">personnel from crime labs sometimes falsely testify that they followed protocols and saw no evidence of contamination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Furthermore, even if the lab itself detected no problems, independent case review often does (see above).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The implied standard of the CSC (proof by assertion of the forensic police and the prosecution’s witnesses without documentation) flies in the face of the principle that justice must be seen to be done.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span></span>It is negligent of the court to accept that when a prosecution witness asserts something as true, the assertion should be sufficient as proof that it is.<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-outline-level: 1;">Ms. Stefanoni claimed that there had been no contamination in her lab in seven years, but it is difficult to see how a large lab could have an error rate of zero.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Reporting on some crime labs in California, <span style="mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">Maura Dolan and Jason Felch</span> <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/26/local/me-dna26" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">The number [of errors] reported was small considering overall caseload -- 3,100 over five years – but [UC Irvine Professor William C.] Thompson said mistakes caught by labs ‘undoubtedly’ make up a small fraction of errors. (In fact, he said, labs that report the most are probably better run than those that claim none.)”</span><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-outline-level: 1;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i>The Six-day gap in testing</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">A central pillar of the CSC’s report (p. 68) is that the six-day gap in testing the knife was sufficient to rule out laboratory contamination:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>“<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">Dr Stefanoni (technical consultant who wrote the advice art. 360 codaproc.pen.), heard also on appeal, had repeated that there was no evidence of contamination: investigations on the knife had been conducted six days before the last DNA trace of the victim, then the analysis had been blocked for a further six days, a period deemed by the same expert Vecchiotti time to be sufficient to prevent laboratory contamination, as declared in the SAL report, wrongly reported as missing initially.”</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Whether this assertion is true is difficult to verify without full discovery taking place.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>It is not clear whether all of the DNA electropherograms were released to the defense, and what might be on the <a href="http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=85&amp;t=2742" target="_blank">possibly unreleased</a> electropherograms obviously cannot be known.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>For the sake of argument, however, we will assume that there was a six-day gap.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The CSC cherry picked one statement to bolster its preferred conclusion; both Conti and Vecchiotti still believe that the DNA evidence is unreliable in spite of the gap. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Moreover, the six-day argument does not address the possibility of secondary/tertiary transfer before or during collection of the knife at all (see part B below).<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The assertion that a six-day gap is sufficient to exclude laboratory contamination is flawed on at least four grounds.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>One, no primary or secondary source in the forensic literature has made this claim, to the best of my knowledge.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Two, any rule of thumb to that effect that was generated with respect to ordinary amounts of DNA may or may not be valid with respect to low template amounts of DNA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In response to a question of mine Dan Krane replied, “<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">Was Meredith's DNA processed in the lab before the knife?&nbsp; If so, then I don't accept that six days is sufficient to exclude contamination in the lab.&nbsp; That would just be bad practice, plain and simple.”</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Meredith’s reference profile was indeed generated before the six-day gap and was obviously much higher in amount that the knife profile, which falls into the low template range.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This is doubly problematic.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Generally, one wants to run the reference profile last, because it is in high quantity, but low template quantities of DNA are especially worrisome.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In response to a previous question of mine Dan Krane wrote, “There is absolutely no question but that contamination is a much greater problem in LCN cases than conventional DNA testing. The reasons that it is a greater problem are both because it is easier to detect contaminants ([Sara] Gino's point) and because it is easier to transfer (and to transfer without knowing) smaller amounts of DNA than larger amounts of DNA.” <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Three, imagine that a forensic worker uses a tool such as a ruler in his or her examination of one piece of evidence, transferring DNA to it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Then the ruler is not used again for a week.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If it were not properly cleaned, the ruler would be quite capable of transferring DNA to a new item of evidence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A recent study of the surfaces and instruments used in autopsies indicates that concerns about contaminated surfaces are well-founded.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The authors <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21962720" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “Using DNA-free swabs, we took samples from instruments used during autopsy and autopsy tables. Surfaces and instruments were routinely cleaned before sampling. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Swabs were subjected to different PCRs to quantify the total amount of DNA and to amplify individual specific STR-markers. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>In most samples, alleles that could be linked to bodies that had been autopsied before were found. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Furthermore, we could show that a DNA transfer from the autopsy table to a body was detectable in four out of six cases investigated.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A review article on trace DNA <a href="http://www.investigativegenetics.com/content/1/1/14" target="_blank">cautioned</a>, “<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">Fingerprint brushes are able to transfer amounts of DNA between exhibits that could generate profiles and may retain biological evidence for a considerable period of time [205,206].”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span></span><a href="http://www.forensicmag.com/articles/2011/12/crime-scene-basics#.UgBUR64ih60" target="_blank">Dick Warrington</a> also warned of the dangers of cross-contamination from instruments.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">In his report on the Gary Leiterman conviction, Dr. Theodore Kessis </span><a href="http://www.garyisinnocent.org/web/Portals/0/documents/KessisReport.pdf" target="_blank">wrote</a><span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;"> (p. 9), “It must be noted however that <span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">contamination</span>errors have been documented where no direct processing link between sample and contaminant have been established, raising the specter that a source of <span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">contamination</span> can linger in a laboratory for some time.”</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Four, in the Jaidyn Leskie case there was a two-day gap in between examination of the condom used in the alleged rape of Ms. P and of Jaidyn Leskie’s clothing at the laboratory.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The police ruled out the possibility that Ms. P was responsible for Jaidyn’s death, and Professor Krane’s <a href="http://www.bioforensics.com/articles/Kranereport.pdf" target="_blank">examination</a> of the electronic data files suggested that the possibility of a coincidental match was quite unlikely.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Therefore, the only plausible explanation is contamination at the stage of handling evidence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>There was also a one-day gap in the examination of two women in the Farah Jama case, and these two examinations are likely to be the cause of the observed DNA contamination, as discussed in the Vincent Report.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Given that one-day and two-day gaps are demonstrably insufficient to ensure a lack of contamination, then why would a six-day gap be sufficient?<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i>Observation of the collection or testing of the evidence</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">In the passage from p. 69 (“<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">documented reporting activities carried out under the eyes of the consultants that had nothing to detect…</i>”) quoted above the court seems to put emphasis on the observation of the collection and seemingly also the laboratory work by the consultants employed by the defense.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This raises some serious questions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>With reference to the collection techniques of the forensic police, the court’s stance is nonsensical.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>On the one hand, the court notes that the consultants did not object.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Yet the court also wrote, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">“</i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: &quot;TimesNewRomanPSMT&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; mso-bidi-font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">the vehicle of contamination must be</span></i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: &quot;TimesNewRomanPSMT&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"> </span></i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: &quot;TimesNewRomanPSMT&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; mso-bidi-font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">identified in order to defuse the data offered by the technical consultants, it</span></i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: &quot;TimesNewRomanPSMT&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"> </span></i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: &quot;TimesNewRomanPSMT&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; mso-bidi-font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">not being enough to assume insufficient professionalism of the operators in sampling…”</span></i><span style="font-family: &quot;TimesNewRomanPSMT&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; mso-bidi-font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;"> (pp. 68-69)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The court implies that pointing out technical flaws using recordings of the evidence collection long after the fact would not be good enough, despite the fact that this is what consultants or independent experts who are brought into the case later on would have to do.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Equally serious is the fact that no one can see DNA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Therefore, when one observes the collection of the evidence, all one can comment on is whether or not the police used good technique (a great deal turns on the meaning of the word assumed).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>It seems as if poor technique is not sufficient in the court’s eyes unless it somehow demonstrates the vehicle of contamination, which it is quite unlikely to be able to do.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span></span>On the one hand, the best technique does not guarantee that contamination will not happen; on the other hand, errors in technique increase the chances that it will.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><o:p></o:p></i></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">If the court also means say that one must raise objections during the observation of testing the items of evidence, then their stance is equally problematic.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Dan Krane observed, “Having the opportunity to witness the testing of samples is of marginal utility at best. Reviews of the underlying data for DNA tests often reveals alternative interpretations of the evidence samples, especially in circumstances were small amounts of DNA are involved and it is difficult to distinguish between signal, noise, and technical artifacts. Observing testing rarely provides any more insights than what should be possible from a review of contemporaneous notes that should be part of a lab's case file. Witnessing testing is far from a cure-all. Problems such as contamination of samples can easily arise before a sample arrives in a laboratory yet could not be detected by an expert observing the testing process itself.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i>Sporadic and global contamination</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CSC wrote, “<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">he [Novelli] excluded absolutely persuasively that the contaminant could be present intermittently and that DNA could remain suspended, and then fall on a particular item.” </span>Despite what the CSC believes, contamination may be sporadic (“intermittent”), as well as global.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Dr. Donald Riley <a href="http://www.scientific.org/tutorials/articles/riley/riley.html" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “Negative controls also can't rule out contamination of individual samples.&nbsp; The individual samples lack individual signs of contamination if it occurs.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Other authors whose works are quoted elsewhere in this entry also made the point that contamination can be sporadic.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span></span><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i>Conclusions, Part A</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CSC’s report suggests an almost willful misunderstanding of DNA profiling.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Its failure to put any significant burden on the prosecution and forensic police is out of step with other nations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The CSC’s stance that contamination must be proved fails to recognize that the exact moment of contamination may never be established even after thorough studies, as were conducted in both the Jaidyn Leskie and Farah Jama cases. A claim that a six-day gap in testing is itself assurance of a lack of contamination is unsupported in the literature and the time gaps in those two cases (during which contamination must have taken place) undercut their contention.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Even if one accepted the dubious argument that contamination must be proved, then it is incumbent upon the prosecution to turn over the electronic data files (including negative controls), machine logs, standard operating procedures, and other relevant forensic data.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Perhaps the most serious error the court made is to accept the assertion that there was no contamination without the methods or standards of proof even being defined.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Under this court’s implicit rules, the prosecution would need only to offer DNA evidence and perhaps testimony from a friendly witness about the lack of contamination to ensure that the DNA evidence would be accepted in any criminal trial. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Even without such testimony, the lack of insistence upon unfettered disclosure would severely hinder the defense from ever successfully challenging forensic DNA evidence on the grounds of contamination or misinterpretation of the data.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Under such rules false convictions based upon faulty DNA evidence are inevitable because a defense based upon a theory of contamination would be virtually impossible to prove.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Part B:&nbsp; Specifics of this case</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i>Kitchen knife</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CSC ignored innocent DNA transfer to the knife as an explanation for the knife DNA profile.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>It is possible that Meredith’s DNA was deposited onto the knife before or during collection by secondary or tertiary transfer, as was <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/01/commentary-on-knox-and-sollecito-case.html" target="_blank">suggested</a> by Dr. Alexander Kekule, among others.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Professor Gregory Hampikian’s <a href="http://www.kboi2.com/news/local/Amanda-Knox-BSU-Retrial-200167731.htm" target="_blank">study</a> of DNA transfer via gloves is further evidence of the plausibility of such mechanisms.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Dried blood is a good source of DNA because small particles can flake off easily, and clothing is a known carrier of DNA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>One can envision tertiary transfer from airborne DNA to officer Gubbiotti’s clothing, to his gloves to the knife.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However, it is not up to the defense to prove a particular route of contamination; instead, it is up to the prosecution to show that they did everything correctly, as discussed in part A.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>There was no reason whatsoever for anyone to unpack and repackage the knife.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Compounding the error, it was unwise to assign officer Gubbiotti to anything having to do with evidence collected at Sollecito’s flat, given the fact that he had been to the women’s flat on the same day. Reporting on the Patrick Waring case Estelle Blackburn <a href="http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/innocent-boys-jail-nightmare/story-e6frg12c-1111113259916" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “In court, police conceded they had not followed best practice in the case.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Various officers said that the Central Park scene was left unguarded from 1.25am on the night, it was a week before it was searched, and the same officers had visited the homes of the girl and the accused which allowed for contamination of evidence.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">What is not best practice in Perth is not best practice in Perugia</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CSC's report does not seriously consider the lack of blood on the kitchen knife the prosecution has argued was one of the murder weapons.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Yet the lack of blood plus the presence of starch call into grave question whether the DNA seen in the profile was actually physically on the knife.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>It is doubtful that one can clean a knife of blood and not of DNA, whether the scratch on the knife observed by Stefononi were real or not.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Detergent water should lyse human cells, releasing DNA and other cellular contents.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Bleach is used routinely to destroy unwanted DNA in molecular biology laboratories.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If the knife were cleaned with bleach, the remaining DNA might show evidence of degradation (peaks associated with long DNA fragments would be smaller than those associated with short fragments).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Yet there is no obvious trend of smaller peaks moving from left to right in the knife electropherogram.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Moreover, there is no evidence that the knife was carefully cleaned; on the contrary, the presence of starch suggests that cleaning was not particularly assiduous.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Forensic scientists Elizabeth Johnson and Gregory Hampikian wrote, “<span style="color: black; font-size: 11.5pt; mso-bidi-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-bidi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">it is unlikely that all chemically detectable traces of blood could be removed while retaining sufficient cells to produce a DNA profile consistent with the victim.”<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Another fundamental failure of the report stems from the fact that the knife profile is a low template sample.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The CSC wrote, <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">“</i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">The discourse of justification, as maintained by the plaintiffs, did not take account of the authoritative voices of dissent concerning the presence of contaminating agents; adequate explanation was not offered as to how this assumption had to cover only some (the most demanding in terms of defense) examined tracks and not others; but above all it is based on the<o:p></o:p></span></i></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">erroneous belief that the burden of proof lies on demonstrating the absence of contamination, whereas the demonstration data that emerged from the technical advice was based on properly documented reporting activities carried out under the eyes of the consultants that had nothing to detect, in a clean laboratory environment, activities conducted according to methods<o:p></o:p></span></i></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">tested, the results of which could certainly be called into question, but for their probative value, not for the operations carried out by preceding contradictory technique, from which did not emerge critical profiles at the time, but only in retrospect (about the decision at First Instance had dwelt from p. 289 to p. 298 on an abundance of topics only partially refuted in an appropriate manner, so that equally significant were the observations of Dr Stefanoni, brought to the attention of the court of Second Instance, at the hearing on 6.9.2011).”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><o:p></o:p></span></i></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">The implicit assertion that the Rome lab was clean enough for low template DNA forensic typing is made dubious by the fact that dedicated facilities have been constructed to carry out this sort of work. </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>To combat the increased risk of contamination in low template DNA profiling, special facilities and handling techniques are needed, as <a href="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&amp;objectid=10408000" target="_blank">noted</a> in the New Zealand Herald: “The ESR has spent $1 million building special anti-contamination areas at its premises in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch. Protocols are being developed for crime scenes where the LCN technique is used and for the handling of samples from collection through to courtroom.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>LCN crime scenes will be divided into cold, warm and hot zones hot being the crime zone. Clothes are put on and discarded at each zone to minimise the risk of contamination.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The crown prosecution service <a href="http://www.sciencespheres.com/2009/10/lcn-dna-profiling-part-ii-watch-where.html" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">The FSS LCN test requires an ultra-clean laboratory and so is more expensive and less widely offered than the standard test.... The site of this bespoke laboratory is remote from other DNA Units, operates stringent entry requirements, is fitted with positive air pressure and specialist lighting and chemical treatments to minimize DNA contamination.”</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In the article “Setting Up a PCR Laboratory” Theodore E. Mifflin <a href="http://www.biosupplynet.com/pdf/01_PCR_Primer_p.5_14.pdf" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “Air handling. For extremely high-performance PCR laboratories that will be involved with detecting very-low-prevalence DNA or RNA molecules (e.g., infectious disease agents in clinical samples), additional measures may be necessary to prevent contamination from the air being recirculated between the pre- and post-PCR laboratories.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Dr. Mifflin’s main focus is pathology, but his points about low levels of DNA are germane to low template DNA forensics in that both situations use polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to amplify very small quantities of DNA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>With respect to the knife profile it is especially worrisome that Ms. Stefanoni presumably used a Speed Vac to concentrate the DNA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The sample would have been vulnerable to <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2013/08/dna-does-fly-and-it-also-transfers.html" target="_blank">airborne</a> contamination upon release of the vacuum or to any DNA left in the Speed Vac from previous samples.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>At the very least, a <a href="http://forensicdnaconsulting.wordpress.com/2011/07/30/understanding-the-independent-dna-experts%E2%80%99-report-in-the-amanda-knox-case-part-i/" target="_blank">control</a> should have been run that was also subjected to the same concentration step.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Indeed, the need for specialized facilities and handling techniques when working in the low template region is recognized <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">even by the prosecution’s own expert witness</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A review article coauthored by Giardini, Spinella, and Novelli <a href="http://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/abs/10.2217/nnm.10.160" target="_blank">stated</a>, “Thus in these conditions [less than 100 picograms of DNA] there is a greater probability of artefacts, partial profiles with fewer alleles, contamination, preferential allele amplification, the complete absence of one allele (allele drop-out) in heterozygous loci and the nonspecific generation of extra alleles (allele drop-in) [78,79]…. Very few laboratories perform low template DNA typing properly, because it requires dedicated facilities and great experience, although there are several published methods for the interpretation of such profiles [80-82].”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>At the time of the murder, the Rome lab was not even certified for standard DNA testing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If a sample is handled in a regular DNA facility, without the special precautions available in dedicated low template DNA facilities, the risk of contamination is unacceptably high.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Even if all such precautions are followed, some prominent DNA scientists find LCN DNA unreliable for forensic profiling.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Nothing in the CSC’s report can be construed even as recognition (let alone an honest assessment) of the special problems inherent in low template DNA forensics or the lack of special precautions taken in the Rome lab.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i>bra clasp</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CSC’s views on the bra clasp profile are at least equally problematic.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This blog has previously discussed DNA contamination on several occasions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Van Oorshot and colleagues <a href="http://www.investigativegenetics.com/content/1/1/14" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “From a theoretical perspective, any DNA deposit that is not immediately relevant to the crime being investigated can be viewed as contamination. In this light, gross or sporadic contamination may appear at any point: (1) before the crime has been committed; (2) in the interval between the crime and securing the crime scene; (3) during the investigation of the scene; and/or (4) within the laboratory.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>There are alleles in the autosomal DNA profile that are unidentified (not belonging to Meredith Kercher, Raffaele Sollecito, or Amanda Knox).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>There are also extra alleles in the YSTR profile that do not belong to Raffaele Sollecito.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Even using a conservative threshold of 50 RFU, one locus has DNA from two additional males.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If one uses a threshold closer to that employed in the knife electropherogram, the number of loci with two additional alleles (therefore two additional donors) goes up.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>It is unrealistic to posit that all of these alleles were deposited during the crime, leading to the conclusion that it was deposited in a way that is unrelated to the crime.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Therefore, the bra clasp has already been shown to be contaminated by the Van Oorshot definition.<o:p></o:p></i></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CSC noted that a cigarette butt was the only other piece of evidence where Sollecito’s DNA was found (p. 68).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>They go on to make the fallacious and foolish equivalence that found DNA equals all DNA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In other words the court believes that the cigarette is the only source of Sollecito’s DNA in the women’s flat.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Yet Mr. Sollecito left fingerprints and presumably used a towel to wash his hands before preparing food.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Unless the forensic police sampled everywhere in the flat, there is no reason to believe that they found all of Mr. Sollecito’s DNA.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">They also discount the problem of the six-week gap between the crime and the collection of the clasp, saying that the house was “<i>boarded up.</i>”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This is highly misleading:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>the police themselves moved Meredith’s mattress and other items from one place to another.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The bra clasp itself moved more than a meter from the point at which it was first seen to the point at which it was collected.</i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The reason that the forensic police should do their work first is to collect samples before other police officers potentially contaminate the scene.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The American Bar Association’s standards for collecting evidence <a href="http://www.americanbar.org/publications/criminal_justice_section_archive/crimjust_standards_dnaevidence.html#2.1" target="_blank">reads</a> in part, <span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">“Standard 2.1 Collecting DNA evidence from a crime scene or other location<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">(a) Whenever a serious crime appears to have been committed and there is reason to believe that DNA evidence relevant to the crime may be present at the crime scene or other location, that evidence should be collected promptly.”<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The reason for being prompt is to <a href="http://www.policeforum.org/library/dna-forensics/DNA%20Forensic%20Evidence.pdf" target="_blank">minimize</a> the chances of contamination:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>“The most important aspect of evidence collection and preservation is protecting the crime&nbsp;scene from the time the first officer or responder arrives until the last piece of evidence&nbsp;has been noted and collected without being contaminated.”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Furthermore, the bra clasp was allowed to decompose during the time that the forensic police stored it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If it could be retested, it is possible that additional evidence of contamination would surface.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The CSC appears oblivious to this additional handicap that the defense faces, due to the impossibility of retesting.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Some commenters have argued that when a piece of evidence goes missing or decomposes while in police care, the court should be obliged to accept the defense’s interpretation of the evidence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>That principle would produce a more just state of affairs than exists presently.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i>Discovery</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CSC wrote (p. 69), “…<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">in a context in which negative controls were made by Dr. Stefanoni, checks that had been stated too superficially to be missing by the experts, simply because they were not attached to the report.”</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This is a tacit admission that the negative controls were never turned over to the defense.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>An anonymous expert in Italian law (one who is unaffiliated with this case) told me that an Italian lawyer can get anything he wants in discovery.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Yet the electronic data files were never released to the defense during the trial of first instance, nor is there any evidence that they have been released since.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Perhaps negative controls were simply not run (this would not be the first time in the history of DNA profiling that controls were simply left out).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Even if one claims that the negative controls were made available in some format, it is certain that they were not made available in the form of EDFs.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Moreover, the lack of forensic discovery was more pervasive than solely the failure to release the EDFs. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;In an article from 25 April 2010&nbsp;</span><span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">Fiona Ness quoted Greg Hampikian “’It’s fairly routine in the US that I send a request and get what I want. But in the Knox case I haven’t been able to get a copy of the standard operating procedures of the lab and without that, it’s hard to see if they even followed their own guidelines.’”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>Not only the EDFs, but also the standard operating procedures and machine logs</span> should have been released but were not.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In addition it is possible that a number of electropherograms were also <a href="http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=85&amp;t=2742" target="_blank">withheld</a>, some from the same time as the knife electropherogram.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CSC was silent about the multiple failures of the prosecution to turn over forensic data and about Ms. Stefanoni’s <a href="http://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/contents/examination-of-the-technical-report-on-the-forensic-genetic-tests-by-dr-patrizia-stefanoni/laboratory-analyses-reported-in-the-rtgif-regarding-item-36-knife/quantification-of-dna/" target="_blank">false testimony</a>about the quantity of DNA on the knife.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Coupled with its fecklessness over Stefanoni’s stonewalling with respect to the results with tetramethylbenzidine, the court’s position contradicts any claim to the effect that an Italian lawyer can get what he wants.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The CSC should have insisted upon complete release of all forensic information as a matter of principle, but even more so given the problematic, questionable nature of the DNA and presumptive blood evidence in this case.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Moreover, to demand that the defense prove contamination without simultaneously demanding complete release of all forensic data, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">especially the negative controls</i>, is absurd:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Lack of complete discovery has repeatedly undermined the defense in this series of trials; therefore, the trials have been grossly unfair.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The Duke lacrosse case might have played out very differently if North Carolina did not have an <a href="http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2007/01/agenda-for-general-assembly.html" target="_blank">open discovery law</a>, even one that is not perfect.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Instead of correcting the failures to comply with reasonable discovery requests in the present case, the CSC has put its stamp of approval on them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If I were an Italian citizen, I would be asking myself whether the CSC would uphold the right to discovery more generally or would it be similarly obsequious to the prosecution.<o:p></o:p></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><i>Forensic technique</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CSC wrote, “So the objective data collected indicating the absence of evidence&nbsp;(already highlighted in the judgment of first instance from p. 281 onwards, which made reference to the video recording of transactions that took place with the precautions of reporting protocols of the forensic team, accustomed to interventions of this nature) giving credit to the hypothesis of contamination…”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>They also wrote, “<span style="font-family: &quot;TimesNewRomanPSMT&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; mso-bidi-font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">but above all it is based on the erroneous belief that the burden of proof lies on demonstrating the absence of contamination, whereas the demonstration data that emerged from the technical advice was based on properly documented reporting activities carried out under the eyes of the consultants that had nothing to detect, in a clean laboratory environment, activities conducted according to methods tested…” (p. 69</span><span style="font-family: &quot;TimesNewRomanPSMT&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-font-kerning: 0pt;">) </span>Yet one of the defense consultants, <a href="http://www.injusticeanywhereforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&amp;t=2511" target="_blank">Professor Potenza</a>, did raise objections to the testing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Therefore, if the court is asserting that no one objected at this stage of the process, it is simply mistaken.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CSC believes that the evidence collection was handled properly; this is one of the most remarkable and troubling positions it took in the section of the motivations document on the genetic investigations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>For example, how could the CSC know whether or not the lab was clean? <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>The independent experts, Conti and Vecchiotti, listed some of the recommendations concerning forensic evidence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>“handling of the objects must be reduced to the minimum possible, and the objects must not be reopened [once packaged], not even for interrogation purposes..” and “Once sealed, the containers must not be reopened outside of the laboratory environment.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This guideline was ignored for the knife taken from Sollecito’s flat, as discussed above.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Conti and Vecchiotti also quote guidelines concerning gloves that will come as no surprise to readers of an entry <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2013/08/dna-does-fly-and-it-also-transfers.html" target="_blank">here</a>, whereas Stefanoni’s beliefs on how frequently gloves are well outside the mainstream.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Alex Heigl <a href="http://www.thirdage.com/news/amanda-knox-appeal-gets-huge-boost-from-dna-expertsam_07-25-2011?page=1" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “There was laughter in the courtroom at one point when the jury was shown a video of the detectives collecting DNA evidence, doing the opposite of what the experts [Conti and Vecchiotti] had just described as the correct way.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Douglas Bremner <a href="http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2011/07/25/courtroom-breaks-into-laughter-at-video-of-goofy-way-evidence-collected-in-amanda-knox-case/" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “Professor Conti showed a film of the evidence collection that they said they had analyzed frame by frame in Amanda Knox case. ‘There are a number of circumstances that don’t follow protocol or proper procedure’ and the work of the scientific police was not supportable.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Does the CSC really believe that these errors never happened, or do they just expect a casual observer of this case to take their word for it?</div><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><i>"Everything is possible"</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CSC wrote, “The Court of Second Instance, supported the probable contamination&nbsp;advanced by experts, based on the <i>"anything is possible", </i>which is not an expendable [usable] argument, because of its generality…”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The CSC plucked this phrase spoken under needlessly hostile cross examination and quoted it without context; it is a dismaying and troubling misrepresentation of Conti and Vecchiotti’s position.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The Conti-Vecchiotti report used a variety of sources to document the manifold failures of the forensic team (see above).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>What they did not do, and what no one should have expected them to do, was to find a particular moment where contamination must have occurred.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-outline-level: 1;"><i>The CSI effect and the cases of Farah Jama and Lukis Anderson</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">DNA evidence is based upon solid science, but there are some limitations inherent in DNA profiling that deserve due consideration from the justice system.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Despite these limitations DNA evidence can exert an effect on the minds of judges and jurors that is out of proportion to the weight it deserves.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This blog has previously covered the case of <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/02/farah-jama-and-forensic-dna.html" target="_blank">Farah Jama</a> on several <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2011/09/likelihood-of-dna-contamination.html" target="_blank">occasions</a>, but the recent case of <a href="http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/06/28/south-bay-paramedics-likely-brought-innocent-mans-dna-to-crime-scene/" target="_blank">Lukis Anderson</a> also underscores the problem of unintended DNA transfer leading to false imprisonment.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A spokesman for the ambulance associated with the paramedics that picked up Mr. Anderson said, “<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">We don’t have any definitive answers as to what may have caused the transmission of DNA going from one person to another.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The Anderson case is also additional evidence that one cannot easily determine a route of DNA transmission, even when it is obvious that it happened.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><i>Conclusions, part B</i><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">The CSC accepted a number of extremely dubious arguments with respect to the DNA evidence in the Knox/Sollecito case while at the same time failing to address good ones.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The CSC did not answer the question of how there could be DNA on a knife without blood.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This paradox alone is strong evidence for contamination. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Remarkably the CSC did not acknowledge the obvious and independently verified failures of the forensic police to follow good practice, both with respect to the knife and the bra clasp.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Its position with respect to the bra clasp, that there was no way for one particular sample of Raffaele’s DNA to have made its way to the clasp, is at best terribly misguided.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The CSC also did not acknowledge that the multiple profiles on the bra clasp force one either to claim many unknown assailants or to acknowledge that it is contaminated.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>On top of these other questionable positions, by failing to compel the release of the forensic data, the CSC eviscerated Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito’s right to challenge the evidence against them. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>The court’s stance not only puts Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito at risk of a false conviction, but doing so also greatly increases the odds that future defendants will be convicted on the basis of DNA evidence that is equally erroneous.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>One might hope that a nation’s supreme court would be a bastion against the state’s encroachment on an individual’s liberty, but the CSC’s report gave no evidence that such hope is justified; instead, the court has acted as if it has fallen prey to the CSI effect. <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Former Australian Supreme Court Justice Vincent summarized the problem perfectly in his report on the Farah Jama case (p. 11).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>“<span style="mso-bidi-language: EN-US;">In other words, the DNA evidence was, like Ozymandias' broken statue in the poem by Shelley, found isolated in a vast desert. And like the inscription on the statue's pedestal, everything around it belied the truth of its assertion. The statue, of course, would be seen by any reasonably perceptive observer, and viewed in its surroundings, as a shattered monument to an arrogance that now mocked itself. By contrast, The DNA evidence appears to have been viewed as possessing an almost mystical infallibility that enabled its surroundings to be disregarded. The outcome was, in the circumstances, patently absurd.”</span><o:p></o:p></div><!--EndFragment--> Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com19tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-608529987483337042013-08-19T21:31:00.000-04:002014-12-15T20:06:30.938-05:00DNA does fly, and it also transfers quite easily<!--StartFragment--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Part 37 in the Knox/Sollecito case<a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8731849270338485723" name="_GoBack"></a><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />Update (11/7/2013)<br />Poy and Van Oorshot <a href="http://www.isfg.org/files/91a748919b016087a260b2ab392c8c8f79a21c0f.05014093_845812755086.pdf" target="_blank">wrote</a>, "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #221e20;">To further help evaluate the above finding swabs were taken from gloves worn whilst examining a heavily soiled dress during routine casework examination. A significant amount of DNA was retrieved which exhibited a genetic profile that matched that of samples taken from the exhibit." &nbsp;This is direct evidence that gloves can transfer DNA.</span><br /><br />Introduction</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The issues of possible DNA contamination and proper versus improper handing of evidence are at the center of the forensic evidence in the trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This entry will examine two aspects of DNA forensics, dealing with airborne DNA and the need to change gloves when handling a fresh item of evidence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;&nbsp;</span>Both kinds of potential problems need to be recognized and addressed in order to minimize the chances of contamination.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The problem of airborne DNA<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Barbie Nadeau <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2009/04/25/amanda-knoxs-bloody-footprint.html" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “…the defense claims that the crime scene was badly compromised during the collection of evidence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Alberto Intini, head of Italy’s national forensic team, disagrees. On the stand, he defended the forensics work and stressed that the crime scene had not been contaminated, especially under cross examination when the defense lawyers tried and failed to prove otherwise. ‘DNA does not fly around like pollen,’ he said…” Ms. Nadeau left her readers with a misimpression.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Later in the trial the defense returned to this issue.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>“’DNA does not have wings, but it flies,’ [defense expert witness Sarah] Gino <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/International/defense-expert-disputes-dna-evidence-amanda-knox-trial/story?id=8680234" target="_blank">cautioned</a>. ‘In a laboratory where hundreds of samples are examined, the risk of contamination exists and should be taken into consideration.’”<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Dr. Intini’s view is seriously in error, as can be ascertained by a number of lines of evidence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A paper on DNA in fossils (BioTechniques 38:569-575, April 2005) notes, “These molecules are easily spread via aerosol transport. One aerosol droplet can contain many more DNA molecules than one gram of fossil material.” In a discussion of how to collect DNA evidence Dick Warrington <a href="http://www.forensicmag.com/articles/2009/04/dna-collection-and-packaging#.Ug1eCK6ml61" target="_blank">advised</a>, “Next, you can prevent contamination by wearing a mask, since you want to avoid coughing and sneezing around the evidence you are processing.”<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">pipettors and pipet tips</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Pipettes are devices used to deliver small volumes of liquids.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>They are used frequently when the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique is used to amplify tiny amounts of DNA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>For that reason the use of aerosol barrier pipette tips is routine in labs engaging in PCR.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>An application note on pipetting <a href="http://www.usascientific.com/pdflit/USASciFilterTipAppNote2.pdf" target="_blank">explained</a>, “Cross-contamination occurs if improper pipetting causes splashes or drips. Even if pipettors are handled properly, aerosols can be generated that contain DNA molecules and can contaminate the pipettor and subsequent pipet products. This demands increasing efforts to reduce the penetration of contaminants by means of filter tips.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Gilson, a manufacturer of pipettes, supplies a <a href="http://www.gilson.com/Resources/Contamination%20pipetting.pdf" target="_blank">technical bulletin</a> that reads in part: “For example, if a technician in a crime lab performs PCR on a blood sample, cross-contamination between samples could result in an erroneous incrimination, even if the technician changes pipette tips between samples. A few blood cells could volatilize in the pipette shaft, stick to the plastic of the pipette, and then get ejected into the next test sample. Modern laboratories have taken account of this fact and are devoting tremendous efforts to avoid this problem through the use of filter tips."<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">laboratory traffic</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">A number of forensic guidelines are in place to protect against aerosol DNA from one source or another. &nbsp;<a href="http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/19159/InTech-Avoiding_errors_and_pitfalls_in_evidence_sampling_for_forensic_genetics.pdf" target="_blank">For example</a>,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;&nbsp;</span>“A ‘one-way traffic’ rule is also observed in the laboratory, once the technician has entered the PCR or the post-PCR rooms, they are not allowed to return to the extraction or pre-PCR rooms until the next day or a complete cloth changing in order to prevent contamination by aerosol particles.” <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>The problems only get more serious in the low template region of analysis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><a href="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&amp;objectid=10408000" target="_blank">Keith Bedford</a> said, “The way I am speaking at the moment, we could probably detect DNA on this pad in front of me.”</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">laboratory design</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Laboratories are constructed in a way to minimize the possibility of contamination due to air flow.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In the article Setting Up a PCR Laboratory.” <a href="http://www.biosupplynet.com/pdf/01_PCR_Primer_p.5_14.pdf" target="_blank">Theodore E. Mifflin</a> discussed how the design of the laboratory can minimize the chances of contamination: “Air handling. For extremely high-performance PCR laboratories that will be involved with detecting very-low-prevalence DNA or RNA molecules (e.g., infectious disease agents in clinical samples), additional measures may be necessary to prevent contamination from the air being recirculated between the pre- and post-PCR laboratories. In this case, the air handlers need to be separate and the air pressure individually adjusted in each laboratory. In the pre-PCR laboratory, there should be a slight positive pressure compared to the air in the connecting hallway. The post-PCR laboratory, in contrast, should be at slightly reduced pressure to pull air in from the outside and thereby prevent escape of amplicons from the completed PCR samples being analyzed inside the lab (Fig. 2). Finally, the air handlers for the pre- and post-PCR laboratories need to be connected to separate air ducts, and each must lead to a separate location for exhaust.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Dr. Mifflin’s main focus is pathology, but his points about low levels of DNA are germane to low template DNA forensics in that both situations use PCR to amplify very small quantities of DNA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">What the police did and did not do with respect to changing gloves<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal">When the forensic police collected evidence at Ms. Kercher’s flat, they did not change their gloves frequently.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><span style="font-family: Times;">One can observe in a </span><span style="font-family: Times;"><a href="http://www.injusticeinperugia.com/contamination.html" target="_blank">series of photographs</a></span><span style="font-family: Times;"> a failure to change gloves over several minutes and several evidence samples.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Barbie Nadeau <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-05-24/will-dna-damn-amanda-knox-/" target="_blank">reported</a>, “Sollecito’s attorney, Giulia Bongiorno, stopped the crime scene video several times to point out errors. For example, Stefanoni testified that she had changed gloves according to official investigation procedures, but Bongiorno stopped the crime scene video twice to show that Stefanoni’s bracelet and the fold of her glove were exactly the same before and after the time she claimed to have changed gloves.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Ms. Nadeau recounts the same incident on p. 133 of Angel Face, her book on the murder of Meredith Kercher.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Ms. Stefanoni’s views on when gloves should be changed are found in the English translation of the Massei report.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>On </span>p. 203 Massei wrote that Stefanoni "specified" that gloves were changed "every time an object was touched that was particularly soaked with blood, and when it was obvious that the gloves would be soiled;"<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Based on pages 204-205, she appears to believe<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>that the presence of a liquid is necessary to bring about contamination by touch.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">What forensic experts say about changing gloves</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">On page 38 of John Butler's 2005 textbook Forensic DNA Typing, he wrote, "Use clean latex gloves for collecting each item of evidence. Gloves should be changed between handling of different items of evidence."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Dick Warrington is the author of some articles in Forensic Magazine and is employed by a company which makes equipment for crime scene investigations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>He <a href="http://www.forensicmag.com/articles/2009/04/dna-collection-and-packaging#.UgBTv64ih60" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “If you pick up one piece of evidence and then pick up another piece of evidence you can transfer evidence from the first item to the second item. You can avoid this kind of cross-contamination if you remember to change your gloves</span><span style="font-family: Times;"> before handling each piece of evidence.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>He also <a href="http://www.forensicmag.com/articles/2012/10/put-gloves-use-gloves-change-gloves#.UgBTda4ih60" target="_blank">advised</a>, “Put on gloves, use gloves, change gloves. Do that every time you touch a piece of evidence. Likewise, use disposable tweezers, scalpels, etc. Change these each time they are used, as well.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Orchid Cellmark’s <a href="http://cm3.missiondata.com/uploads/43/File/Forensic%20Evidence%20Handling%20Guidelines.pdf" target="_blank">guidelines</a> for collecting DNA evidence read in part, “Use clean latex gloves for collecting each item of evidence. It is recommended the gloves be changed between the collection of each item of evidence.”</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Conclusions<o:p></o:p></span></div><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">The need to use fresh gloves when handling a new piece of evidence is utterly noncontroversial. &nbsp;Yet it is obvious from video of the collection, that the forensic police did not change gloves frequently. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>Their failure to follow the consensus view of what is good practice might have contaminated the bra clasp and might have led to mixed DNA samples elsewhere in the flat.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;&nbsp;The fact that airborne DNA can compromise an experiment is likewise the consensus view of practitioners of PCR. &nbsp;</span>Dr. Intini’s ignorance of the dangers of aerosol DNA shake one’s confidence in the ability of a forensic lab under his supervision to combat the dangers of airborne DNA contamination even in routine DNA profiling, let alone low template profiling.</span><!--EndFragment--> <br /><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><br /></span>Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com21tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-92140930587085244792013-07-30T14:49:00.000-04:002013-07-30T14:49:51.792-04:00An interview with David BaldingPart 36 in the Knox/Sollecito case<br /><br />Professor David Balding recently published an <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/06/28/1219739110.abstract" target="_blank">analysis</a> of the bra clasp DNA. &nbsp;It may be helpful to explain some terms found in this article. &nbsp;John Butler (Fundamentals of Forensic DNA Typing) defines the liklihood ratio (LR) as “The ratio of the probabilities of the same event under different hypotheses, and he explains that the prosecution’s hypothesis is usually the numerator, and the defense’s hypothesis is usually the denominator.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A ban is a unit of expressing the weight of evidence (WoE). <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;</span>This scale is logarithmic; a likelihood ratio of three bans is equal to one thousand. &nbsp;Some months ago Dr. Balding was kind enough to answer some of my questions about this work.<br /><br /><!--StartFragment--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>Does Raffaele Sollecito¹s DNA fall into the category of low template DNA,<o:p></o:p></i></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>and if so, should two separate amplifications have been run?</i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">There's no strict definition of "low-template" but broadly yes the peaks associated with Sollecito are low (but not those associated with Kercher, they are high). &nbsp;Conti-Vecchiotti discuss a threshold of 50 rfu below which a peak should not be relied on; in the UK, that threshold was used in the past but nowadays as techniques have improved the threshold is often lower, 25 or 30. &nbsp;However that doesn't matter here as all the peaks associated with Sollecito are well above 50: there is a 65, a 70 and a 98, all the 26 other peaks are above 100. &nbsp;So it is not extremely low template - many low-template cases are successfully prosecuted in the UK even when some peaks fall below the threshold and so are discounted. &nbsp;In this case all the peaks associated with Sollecito seem clear and distinct &nbsp;so I think there can be no concern about the quality of the result as far as it concerns him or Kercher.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Replication is generally a good thing and is nowadays done in most cases in my experience, but not all - one problem is that replication splits the sample and so can increase the chance of not getting a usable result. &nbsp;But although replication is desirable it is not essential. &nbsp;(In a sense there already is replication, because each of the 15 loci is an independent test.) &nbsp;This is all a matter of weight of evidence, which Conti-Vecchiotti paid no attention to: if you measure the weight of evidence properly, that accounts for the extra assurance that comes from replication and gives a stronger result (or conversely gives a weaker result if there is not replication). &nbsp;But because Sollecito is fully represented in the stain at 15 loci (we still only use 10 in the UK, so 15 is a lot), the evidence against him is strong even allowing for the additional uncertainty due to non-replication.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>Are there contributors other than Raffaele Sollecito and Meredith Kercher to the autosomal profiles? &nbsp;If so, how does the presence of this additional DNA affect the bra clasp as evidence?</i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Yes, Conti-Vecchiotti identified a further 12 above-threshold peaks at alleles that could not have come from Sollecito or Kercher. &nbsp;They correctly criticised the scientific police for ignoring these: many do appear to be stutter peaks which are usually ignored, but 4 are not and definitely indicate DNA from another individual. &nbsp;The extra peaks are all low, so the extra individuals contributed very little DNA. &nbsp;That kind of extraneous DNA is routine in low-template work: our environment is covered with DNA from breath and touch, including a lot of fragmentary DNA from degraded cells that can show up in low-template analyses. &nbsp;There is virtually no crime sample that doesn't have some environmental DNA on it, from individuals not directly involved in the crime. &nbsp;This does create additional uncertainty in the analysis because of the extra ambiguity about the true profile of the contributor of interest, but as long as it is correctly allowed for in the analysis there is no problem - it is completely routine.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>Are there contributors to the Y-STR profile other than Raffaele Sollecito? &nbsp;</i></span><i>If so, how does the presence of this DNA affect our interpretation of the&nbsp;</i><i>bra clasp as evidence?</i></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">I haven't looked closely at the Y evidence - there seems no need for it because the autosomal evidence is overwhelming for the presence of DNA from Sollecito. &nbsp;But from a look at Conti-Vecchiotti, it seems to back up the conclusion from the autosomal profiles: Sollecito's alleles are all represented and these generate the highest peaks, but there are some low peaks not attributable to him; so at least one of the additional contributors of low-level DNA to the sample was male.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>The bra clasp was collected about 47 days after the murder, and it was&nbsp;</i></span><i>found in a different location from where it was initially observed. &nbsp;In&nbsp;</i><i>the interim many people entered the cottage and items from her room were&nbsp;</i><i>removed. &nbsp;Are these concerns sufficient for the clasp to be excluded as</i></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>evidence?</i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">The only worry would be if somehow DNA from Sollecito was brought into the room and deposited on item 165B. &nbsp;I don't know enough about what happened to say if that was likely but I'd guess that people walking in and out of the room etc would be unlikely to do that.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>The clasp was collected with gloves that were not clean, not with&nbsp;</i></span><i>disposable tweezers (videos <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLE4s3jXTVU&amp;feature=related" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMaTI0SiuLw" target="_blank">here</a>). &nbsp;The glove was handled by more than one person. &nbsp;Are&nbsp;</i><i>these concerns sufficient for the clasp to be excluded as evidence? If&nbsp;</i><i>not, should the clasp be given less weight as evidence because of them?</i></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Same comment - the only concern is if any of this could have transferred DNA from Sollecito onto item 165B.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>Would you care to comment on the storage of the clasp after the forensic police tested it?</i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">I know nothing about it.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>Did you analyze the electronic data files? &nbsp;Did you examine the laboratory¹s own protocols and machine logs?</i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">I have only seen the epgs for the autosomal DNA profiles of 165B. &nbsp;There is an unclear version of them in the Conti-Vecchiotti report, but Prof Vecchiotti kindly provided my with a clean set.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><i>Did you examine the negative controls?</i><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><span style="font-family: Times; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">No.</span><!--EndFragment--> Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com124tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-33601993852582153112013-07-09T22:38:00.002-04:002013-07-12T20:33:14.543-04:00The sensitivities of presumptive and confirmatory blood tests<!--StartFragment--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Part 35 in the Knox/Sollecito case</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Introduction</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Forensic tests for blood have been the subject of four previous entries, <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/03/luminol-and-some-of-footprint-evidence.html" target="_blank">one</a> of which discussed the pseudoperoxidase activity of hemoglobin, <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2011/07/forensic-tests-for-presence-of-blood.html" target="_blank">one</a> of which discussed the difference between presumptive and confirmatory testing, <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2011/09/questions-and-answers-about-mixed-dna.html" target="_blank">one</a> of which covered the difference between mixed DNA versus mixed blood, and <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2012/07/presumptive-blood-testing-in.html" target="_blank">one</a> of which covered some case histories and which also treated the use of tetramethylbenzidine (TMB) in forensic testing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>Confirmatory tests for blood can be performed by testing for the presence of a biomolecule that is unique to blood:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>hemoglobin (the oxygen-carrying protein found within red blood cells), immunoglobulin G (an antibody found in plasma), or glycophorin A, (a membrane protein found on the surface of red blood cells).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span><o:p></o:p></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Executive Summary</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Positive presumptive blood tests indicate the possibility of blood, but only confirmatory tests allow for the conclusion that blood is present.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Modern confirmatory testing of blood is extremely sensitive, yet was apparently not used on the luminol-positive areas in the present case.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The reported sensitivities of presumptive tests for blood have varied widely. Among the reasons for the differences are differences in concentrations of the chemical reagents, in the times of reaction, whether or not the samples were dried, and whether the reagents were tested under laboratory or field conditions. Luminol is very sensitive, but the intensity of the chemiluminescence decreases with increasing dilution.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Luminol is at best only slightly more sensitive than tetramethylbenzidine (TMB), and any difference is dependent on the particulars of how each test is performed.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The luminol-positive areas in this cases tested negative by TMB; moreover, there was no reported testing of these areas by confirmatory experiments. &nbsp;Therefore, the luminol-positive substance or substances is (are) more likely to be something other than blood.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>A brief overview of confirmatory testing of blood</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The National Forensic Science Technology Center <a href="http://www.nfstc.org/pdi/Subject02/pdi_s02_m02_01_a.htm" target="_blank">wrote</a>, "The line between screening and identification is not always clear. For example, while examining the clothing of a suspect, a forensic biologist might visually locate a brown stain that presumptively tested positive for blood and was then DNA typed. The DNA type is found to match the victim. Knowing that the loci tested are higher primate specific, what conclusions can be drawn?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The only unqualified conclusion that can be offered is that the stain contains DNA that matches the victim. It has not been proven to be blood.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If asked ‘Could the results have arisen because the material tested was the blood of the victim?’ then an answer of ‘Yes’ is justified. However, it would be wrong to report that the material was human blood with a DNA type that matched the victim. The material was not subjected to confirmatory testing for blood or proven to be human in origin." &nbsp;It must always be borne in mind that the burden of proving the existence of blood falls on the prosecution; it is not the job of the defense to prove that a substance that gives a positive result in a presumptive test is not blood.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Modern confirmatory testing for blood owes its specificity to the use of antibodies, proteins which recognize (bind to) certain molecules (antigens) and which generally do not recognize even closely related molecules.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Modern confirmatory testing owes its sensitivity (see below) to the use of enzymes that are covalently linked (conjugated) to the antibodies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Such tests are called enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays or <a href="http://www.piercenet.com/browse.cfm?fldID=F88ADEC9-1B43-4585-922E-836FE09D8403" target="_blank">ELISAs</a>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Enzymes are catalysts; therefore, for each antibodt/antigen complex that is formed, perhaps thousands of substrate molecules are converted into products, which may be easily detected because they are often colored.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>ELISAs come in a variety of forms that are beyond the scope of the present article.&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>The general lack of confirmatory testing in the Knox/Sollecito case</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The lack of confirmatory testing greatly weakens greatly the prosecution's conjecture that the luminol-positive areas in the Knox/Sollecito case were the result of blood. A true confirmatory test was apparently never performed on these areas; therefore, one cannot conclude that luminol-positive material was blood.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>These areas also returned negative results in the TMB tests.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Yet the forensic police did use confirmatory testing on Rep. 199, which came from Filomena’s room, indicating that they had the ability to perform such tests.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>With respect to the luminol-positive, DNA-negative areas in this case, Drs.Virkler and Lednev <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2011/07/forensic-tests-for-presence-of-blood.html" target="_blank">said</a>, “The prosecution should have used much more convincing evidence to prove the presence of blood.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Indeed. &nbsp;Confirmatory tests have become rapid and sensitive; therefore, it is difficult to see why one would not perform them.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>The sensitivities of two confirmatory tests for blood</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The calculated and reported values of the sensitivies (below) might be too optimistic by a factor of ten, and yet still they would indicate that confirmatory tests for blood are extremely sensitive. &nbsp;One possible problem is that eventually proteins such as hemoglobin denature, meaning that they lose their biological activity (denaturation implies a change in the three-dimensional shape of a protein or that they undergo chemical alteration).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Denaturation could keep a protein from reacting in confirmatory experiments. That is why the several-month delay in testing Rep. 199 using a confirmatory test was so unfortunate.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Whole blood is about 55% serum and 45% red blood cells (RBCs), although there is some variation in this ratio among individuals. Hemoglobin<span style="font-weight: normal;"> (Hb) is found in RBCs and immunoglobulin G (IgG) is found in serum. &nbsp;My calculations of the sensitivities of confirmatory blood tests attempt to normalize to whole blood.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Robert Kerber <a href="http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ed084p1541" target="_blank">wrote</a>, "The concentration of hemoglobin<span style="font-weight: normal;"> molecules in red blood cells is so high (340 mg/mL, 2.3 mM) that they almost could be said to be on the verge of crystallization." (J. Chem. Education Vol. 84 No. 9 September 2007, p. 1541). Therefore, the concentration of hemoglobin is 150 mg/mL in whole blood. 150 mg/mL divided by 2.2 x 10<sup>-5</sup> mg/mL = 7 x 10<sup>6</sup>. This calculated dilution factor for detection of hemoglobin is close to the reported values for the HemaTrace test. &nbsp;One <a href="http://www.4n6shop.cz/static_pages_files/file/Hematrace_Michigan%20State%20Police_Connie%20Swander_Jennifer%20Stites.pdf">article</a>from the Michigan State Police listed its sensitivity as 0.05 µg/mL, and the authors gave its maximum dilution factor of blood that would still allow for its detection as 1:16,777,216. Another <a href="http://www.4n6shop.cz/static_pages_files/file/Hematrace_Can_Soc_For_Science_Validation_Sarah%20Johnston.pdf">study</a>provides 0.07 µg/mL as the limit of detection.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Williams and coworkers (Forensic Science International Vol. 190, 2009, pp. 91–97) described a sandwich ELISA protocol for immunoglobulin G that have a detection limit of at least 0.1 µg/mL, possibly higher.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>ELISA stands for enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and it is a type of assay that uses antibodies to bring about specificity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp;&nbsp; In the textbook&nbsp;</span><span style="font-style: normal;">Principles of Biochemistry, Mammalian Biochemistry, seventh edition (McGraw Hill, 1983),&nbsp;</span>Smith&nbsp;<i>et al.</i>&nbsp;indicated that the average concentration of IgG is 12 mg/mL in plasma, therefore its concentration is 6.6 mg/mL in whole blood.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Along with the detection limit of 0.1 µg/mL, this concentration suggests that the test for IgG should detect blood diluted up to a factor of 6.6 x 10<sup>4</sup>, similar to the value of 100,000 reported by Williams and coworkers.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Reports on the sensitivities of presumptive blood tests</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The following list is an attempt to survey the forensic literature for information on the abilities of presumptive tests, especially luminol and TMB, to detect diluted blood.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>There are wide ranges for the reported sensitivities of each.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A previous <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2012/07/presumptive-blood-testing-in.html" target="_blank">blog entry</a> rebutted the suggestion that the reason for the lack of positive TMB results was the supposed greater sensitivity of luminol vs. TMB. &nbsp;One important conclusion of that entry is that it is commonplace in forensics to follow a fluorescent test such as luminol with a colorimetric test such as TMB. &nbsp;<o:p></o:p><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">From p. 258 of the English translation of the Massei report, “She [defense expert witness Sarah Gino] added that, in her own experience, analyses performed with TMB on traces revealed by Luminol give about even results: 50% negative, 50% positive, <b>[276]</b></span><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">”</span></div><!--StartFragment--><!--EndFragment--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">L. Garofano, M. Pizzamiglio, A. Marino, A. Brighenti, F. Romani. &nbsp;"A comparative&nbsp;study of the sensitivity and specifity of luminol and fluorescein on diluted and&nbsp;aged bloodstains and subsequent STRs typing," Int. Congress Ser. 1288 (2006), pp.&nbsp;657–659.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />Kastle-Meyer: 1 part in 10,000<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Leucocrystal violet: 1 part in 10,000<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Emma Johnston; Carole E. Ames; Kathryn E. Dagnall; John Foster; and Barbara E. Daniel.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">J Forensic Sci, May 2008, Vol. 53, No. 3,&nbsp;“Comparison of Presumptive Blood Test Kits Including Hexagon OBTI”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />Hemastix 1 part in 50,000 [note: Hemastix is based on the TMB test]<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Kastle Meyer 1 part in 10,000<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Filippo Barni, Simon W. Lewis, Andrea Berti, Gordon M. Miskelly, Giampietro Lago. Talanta 72 (2007), pp. 896–913,&nbsp;“Forensic application of the luminol reaction as a presumptive test for latent blood detection”<br /><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">“Luminol can be used to detect the presence of minor, unnoticed or hidden bloodstains diluted down to a level of 1:10<sup>6</sup> (1 µL of blood in 1 L of solution) [18,63,72].”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal">Joanne L. Webb, Jonathan I. Creamer, and Terence I. Quickenden. &nbsp;Luminescence 2006; 21: pp. 214–220,&nbsp;DOI: 10.1002/bio.908,&nbsp;“A comparison of the presumptive luminol test for blood with four non-chemiluminescent forensic techniques”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Hemastix 1:1,000,000 solution<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Luminol 1:5,000,000 solution<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Both values are said to be consistent with the literature.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">“What is most apparent is that the literature available on presumptive blood detection techniques is somewhat variable. There is a great diversity of experimental conditions, which makes comparison between reagents tested by different authors difficult.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Cox, M. “A Study of the Sensitivity and Specificity of Four Presumptive Tests&nbsp;for Blood,” Journal of Forensic Sciences, JFSCA, Vol. 36, No. 5, Sept. 1991, pp. 1503-1511.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br />TMB gives a fast positive result at 1/10,000 dilution; a slower reaction is seen up to 1 to 1,000,000 dilution.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Shanan S. Tobe; Nigel Watson; and Niamh Nic Dae´id.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">J Forensic Sci, January 2007, Vol. 52, No. 1,&nbsp;doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00324.x,&nbsp;“Evaluation of Six Presumptive Tests for Blood, Their Specificity, Sensitivity, and Effect on High Molecular-Weight DNA”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“In the past 50 years, there have been many tests conducted on the sensitivity of presumptive blood tests (4,6–15). The findings of these studies are in great contradiction with each other. Sensitivities for luminol range from 1:200 (11) to 1:100,000,000 (6); from 1:200 (11) to 1:100,000 for leuchomalachite green (LMG) (8); and from 1:2,000 (12,13) to 1:10,000,000 for phenolphthalein (9). The various differences in the sensitivities reported by different researchers of presumptive blood tests are probably caused by differences in reagent concentrations, methods of preparation of samples, reagents and results, and in the type of material containing the blood (4).”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">From Table 2<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Luminol 1 part in 100,000<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Hemastix 1 part in 10,000 within 1 minute; 1 part in 100,000 within 2 minutes<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“The luminol reagent reacted instantly, with both the 1:10,000 and 1:100,000 dilution factors producing a blue luminescence. The luminescence lasted for close to a minute. However, both dilution factors were much less intense than the positive control of whole blood. The reaction with the 1:100,000 dilution factor was extremely faint.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“The Bluestar reagent reacted instantly with the 1:10,000 with a blue luminescent glow but faded within a few seconds. The 1:100,000 dilution showed slight reactivity, with five of the 25 samples showing a very faint positive, which faded in a few seconds. However, both dilution factors were much less intense than the positive control of whole blood.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Anders Nilsson. &nbsp;The Swedish National Laboratory of Forensic Science (SKL), Linköping 2006,&nbsp;“The forensic luminol test for blood: unwanted interference and the effect on subsequent analysis”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">“Under laboratorial conditions CL [chemiluminescence] was detected from luminol treated stains of the used hemoglobin<span style="font-weight: normal;"> solution (corresponding to blood) diluted up to 5·10<sup>6</sup> times. A comparably high sensitivity of the luminol test has been reported in other studies [22].<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However the sensitivity is probably not as great under the conditions found at a crime scene and here, depending on several factors, perhaps one may “only” see blood diluted to about 1:10000 [14].”<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">D. D. Garner; K. M. Cano; R. S. Peimer; and T. E. Yeshion. &nbsp;Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 21, No. 4, 1976,&nbsp;“An Evaluation of Tetramethylbenzidine as a Presumptive Test for Blood”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">“As shown in Table 1, both reagents at the 0.05 M concentration will detect one part<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">blood in 10 000 parts isotonic saline. Doubling the concentration of the reagent results in<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">a tenfold increase in sensitivity for both TMB and benzidine. The lowest level of detection of blood by both chemicals was 1 ppm.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">LJ Blum, P Esperanca, S Rocquefelte. &nbsp;Can. Soc. Forensic Sci. J. Vol. 39. No 3 (2006) pp. 81–100,&nbsp;“A new high-performance reagent and procedure for latent bloodstain detection based on luminol chemiluminescence”</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Dilution Light intensity a.u.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">1:5 <span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</span>314,600<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">1:100 <span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span>89,720<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">1:1000 <span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</span>6,725<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">1:10000 <span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;</span>1730<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">“As expected, the lower the dilution factor, the lower the light intensity (Fig. 7).”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>General reference on presumptive and confirmatory tests for blood, semen, and saliva</b><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal">Kelly Virkler, Igor K. Lednev. &nbsp;Forensic Science International 188 (2009), pp. 1–17, &nbsp;“Analysis of body fluids for forensic purposes: From laboratory testing to non-destructive rapid confirmatory identification at a crime scene”</div>Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-3617293208071972522012-12-22T23:48:00.003-05:002012-12-22T23:48:26.560-05:00Unresolved issues in the latest round of DNA testing in the Hank Skinner case<br /><div class="MsoNormal">DNA testing in the Hank Skinner case began again in 2012 after the state of Texas dropped its objections after a fight that lasted over a decade.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>After the release of some preliminary data, the prosecution declared that it confirmed Skinner’s guilt, as reported by <a href="http://www.austinchronicle.com/blogs/news/2012-11-15/new-dna-testing-confirms-skinners-guilt-ags-office-says/" target="_blank">Jordan Smith</a> in the <a href="http://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2012-11-23/dna-testing-puts-hank-skinner-at-murder-scene/" target="_blank">Austin Chronicle</a>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Mr. Skinner’s <a href="https://prisonmovement.wordpress.com/2012/11/16/statement-from-attorney-for-hank-skinner-in-response-to-initial-dna-test-results-in-hank-skinner-case/" target="_blank">attorney</a> issued a response stating that not all testing was complete and that defense experts had not had a chance to examine the results yet.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Skinner had been found guilty of murdering his live-in girlfriend Twila Busby and her two grown sons.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>He claims that he is innocent, and there is an alternate suspect in this case, Robert Donnell, who was Twila’s uncle.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"> </div><div class="MsoNormal">Mr. Skinner’s DNA was found on <a href="http://www.austinchronicle.com/documents/skinner.DNA.test.advisory.pdf" target="_blank">10 of 40</a> items tested.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Many of the items tested appear to have been blood, and they come from various locations around the house.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>There are profiles that belong to an unknown individual or individuals, including one unknown profile on a knife that has DNA deposited by Mr. Skinner and by Elwin Caler, one of Ms. Busby’s sons.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>There is also an unknown profile from a bloodstain in the sons’ bedroom.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The unknown profiles may not be complete, but that is one of several issues that further testing might resolve.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><!--StartFragment--> </div><div class="MsoNormal">My conclusions at this time are that the advisory paints an incomplete (therefore misleading) picture of the case and is overinterpreting both the previous DNA results and the present ones.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>For example, the prosecution’s advisory summarized the testimony of a witness who claimed that Mr. Skinner threatened her, but the witness later recanted, a fact that was ignored. &nbsp;The advisory failed to mention anything about two bloody handprints and bloody bootprints that have been discussed in <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2011/11/i-once-again-oppose-impending-execution.html">one report</a> on this case. "The State tested the bloody handprints against those of Hank Skinner. &nbsp;Hank was good for the three handprints near the back of the house. &nbsp;The handprint on the trash bag, and presumably the handprint on the front storm door, belonged to someone else." The existence of the jacket, the handprints that apparently do not match, and the bloody bootprints that are not his size are some of the objections to the prosecution's case.</div><div class="MsoNormal"> <br /> </div><div class="MsoNormal">With respect to DNA profiling the first problem is that the most compelling piece of exculpatory evidence, what one person identified as Donnell’s jacket, has been lost before it could be tested.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The jacket is stained with blood and sweat.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If either Donnell’s DNA were found on the jacket or if some of the blood were Twila’s), that would establish reasonable doubt, at the very least.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However, at present there is no reference profile of Robert Donnell (see also below).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The failure to obtain his profile could be a consequence of the investigatory <a href="http://www.forensicmag.com/news/why-police-and-prosecutors-suspect-wrong-person-and-then-dig" target="_blank">tunnel vision</a>that has plagued this case, as a <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2011/11/hank-skinner-death-penalty-and.html" target="_blank">previous entry here</a> indicated.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>I suggest that the State of Texas exhume his body or obtain his DNA in some other way.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><!--StartFragment--> </div><div class="MsoNormal">A second problem centers around whether Twila was sexually assaulted on the night of her death.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The vaginal DNA profiling was performed by standard autosomal DNA methods, in which DNA deposited by a possible perpetrator can become overwhelmed by the victim’s own DNA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>There is nothing in the public record of <a href="http://www.forensicdnacenter.com/dna-ystr.html" target="_blank">Y-STR</a> testing being performed, despite its routine use in sexual assaults.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The unique advantage of Y-STR profiling is that it involves only the Y chromosome, which women do not have; therefore, a male contribution to a mixture can be selectively amplified by the polymerase chain reaction.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Either the laboratory did not do Y-STR testing, or it did but the results were not included in the advisory.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In addition the fingernail clippings either showed Ms. Busby’s DNA, or they did not show any DNA.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Moreover, <a href="http://www.bodetech.com/forensic-solutions/dna-technologies/y-str/" target="_blank">fingernail scrapings</a>can also be tested with Y-STR forensics, which has <a href="http://marketing.appliedbiosystems.com/images/Product_Microsites/QUANTDUO/PDF/April_2007_02A_Cust_Corner_Sorenson_Successes_YFiler.pdf" target="_blank">marginally higher sensitivity</a> than autosomal testing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Mr. Skinner’s attorney indicated that the defense has requested additional testing; therefore, it is possible that Y-STR results will be forthcoming.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><!--StartFragment--> </div><div class="MsoNormal">A third problem concerns the existence of DNA from at least one unknown person.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The evidence with respect to the knife appears inculpatory at first glance, yet it is undisputed that Mr. Skinner was bleeding that night. &nbsp;It is likely that his contribution to the knife DNA profile arose from his blood, and one obvious possibility is that he cut himself while committing the murders. The defense should raise two alternate hypotheses. &nbsp;There is chance that his profile arose from casual use of this knife around the house prior to the murder.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In addition, Mr. Skinner was incoherent according to one witness due to a combination of alcohol and codeine; therefore, his DNA could have been deposited by his possibly handling the knife at some point after the murder when he was allegedly stumbling around the house.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>It is also undisputed that he was in close proximity to the victims that night; therefore, positing that he handled the knife, although speculative, is not unreasonable.&nbsp;</div><div class="MsoNormal"> <br /> </div><div class="MsoNormal">The <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2011/11/i-once-again-oppose-impending-execution.html">Skeptical Juror</a> wrote, "Fresh blood drops were found on the sidewalk, near the front door of the house where the murders took place.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Those drops were tested. &nbsp;The DNA from those drops belonged not to Hank Skinner, but to an unidentified male." The most recent DNA profiling also did not test the gauze, even though it may have been used to wipe the knife, which is odd.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>I wonder whether this profile was similar to or different from the ones turned up in the most recent round of testing, and I also wonder who the DNA donor(s) is(are).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The former question might be addressed by treating the DNA from the blood drops on the sidewalk as something like a reference profile.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>DNA mixtures are sometimes deconvoluted by a process known as <a href="http://www.bioforensics.com/sequential_unmasking/index.html" target="_blank">sequential unmasking</a>, in which a forensic worker is given information about the reference profiles in a gradual manner, only after completing a relevant portion of the analysis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Yet even the mere existence of blood from another person calls for an explanation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Was the blood fresh?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>If so, who was bleeding besides Mr. Skinner, Ms. Busby, Mr. Caler, and Mr. Randy Busby, Twila’s other son (all of whose reference profiles are available)?<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"> </div><div class="MsoNormal">Finally, a fourth problem is that one of the samples may have been contaminated with some DNA from a laboratory worker.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>This kind of event actually happens not infrequently in DNA profiling, but it does mean that the defense needs to scrutinize the negative controls and machine logs to look for other evidence of contamination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Negative controls will detect large scale contamination that affects multiple items of evidence, but will often not detect sporadic contamination affecting a single sample, as Professor <a href="http://www.bioforensics.com/articles/Thompson_Champion_Tarnish.pdf" target="_blank">William Thompson</a> has pointed out:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>“However, the same processes that cause detectable errors in some cases can cause undetectable errors in others.<span style="font-family: Minion-Regular; font-size: 10.0pt;"> </span>If DNA from a suspect is accidentally transferred into a ‘blank’ control sample, it is obvious that something is wrong; if the suspect’s DNA is accidentally transferred into an evidentiary sample, the error is not obvious because there is another explanation — i.e., that the suspect is the source of the evidentiary DNA.”<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">One hopes and expects that future rounds of DNA testing will address some of these shortcomings.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Both the victims’ families and Hank Skinner deserve nothing less than a full accounting of what happened that terrible night.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>However, the prosecutor brings charges in the name of the people; therefore, every citizen has some responsibility for what happens in a courtroom, including the times when there is a miscarriage of justice.</div><!--EndFragment--> <br /> <!--EndFragment--> <br /> <!--EndFragment--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><!--EndFragment--> <br /> <!--EndFragment--> <br /> <!--EndFragment--> <br /> <!--EndFragment--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><!--EndFragment--> Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-11949503345076332142012-07-10T23:24:00.001-04:002013-07-15T14:20:30.257-04:00Presumptive blood testing in the Chamberlain, Taylor, Lovejoy, and Knox/Sollecito cases<br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Part 34 in the Knox/Sollecito case</b><br /><b><br /></b><b>Update (9 July 2013)</b>&nbsp;&nbsp;I renumbered this entry from 35 to 34.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">In this post we will examine presumptive testing in the cases against three other individuals before returning to the Knox/Sollecito case.&nbsp; Presumptive blood testing has been a subject of this series <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/03/luminol-and-some-of-footprint-evidence.html" target="_blank">twice</a> <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2011/07/forensic-tests-for-presence-of-blood.html" target="_blank">before</a>.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Lindy Chamberlain<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">In 1982 <a href="http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/lindy-baby-azaria-and-the-dingo-3002965.html" target="_blank">Lindy Chamberlain</a> was tried for the 1980 murder of her daughter Azaria near Ayers Rock in the Northern Territory of Australia.&nbsp; A presumptive blood test in the Chamberlain’s car was positive:&nbsp;&nbsp;The <i>ortho</i><span style="font-style: normal;">-tolidene test is similar to the tetramethylbenzidine (TMB) test in that both rely upon the pseudoperoxidase activity of hemoglobin to produce a color change.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">There are at least two problems with taking the positive result as strongly inculpatory evidence.&nbsp; Problem one is that the <i><a href="http://www.blogger.com/goog_1841497607">ortho</a></i><span style="font-style: normal;"><a href="http://nzic.org.nz/ChemProcesses/biotech/12A.pdf" target="_blank">-tolidene</a> test is subject to a number of false positives, and copper dust (common in the <a href="http://www.lmconference.com.au/papers/2005/raymond.html" target="_blank">Chamberlain’s home</a> of Mt. Isa) is one substance that produces false positive in catalytic tests such as this one.&nbsp; Yet the head of the forensic laboratory downplayed the idea that the </span><i>ortho</i><span style="font-style: normal;">-tolidene test gives false positives, claiming that interfering substances gave a different color than blood in this experiment.&nbsp; When asked whether an experienced biologist could confuse a substance such as copper with blood in this test, he replied, “Not while I’m around.”&nbsp; One wishes that someone had subjected Ms. Kuhl and her superior to a blind test of their abilities.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Problem two is related to the issue of <a href="http://www.videojug.com/interview/collecting-evidence-at-a-crime-scene-2#what-is-substrate-control-in-csi" target="_blank">substrate controls</a>.&nbsp; Substrate controls are used to check areas nearby a stain to see whether a positive test reaction is related to the stain or not.&nbsp; <a href="http://www.lmconference.com.au/papers/2005/raymond.html" target="_blank">Dr. T. Raymond</a> wrote,&nbsp; “The original trial scientist, Mrs Joy Kuhl obtained positive (ortho-tolidine) presumptive tests for blood in a number of areas in the Torana – including the carpet, bolt hole region, nearside seat hinge, console and items that were purported to have been in the car – a chamois, a towel and a pair of nail scissors. Some of these areas were incidentally inaccessible without the removal (using appropriate screwdriver) of surface panels.”&nbsp; The inaccessible areas should have been considered substrate controls. The fact that they were&nbsp;<s><span style="font-family: Times;">negative</span></s><span style="font-family: Times;"> positive</span>&nbsp;should have given the forensic team pause but did not.&nbsp; With respect to the luminol presumptive test for blood, <a href="http://chem-faculty.lsu.edu/mccarley/Chemistry%202001/Articles_SP2008/Barni_Talanta_Luminol_Forensics.pdf" target="_blank">Barni</a> and coworkers wrote, “Regardless of how the stains are collected, the essential requirements to be met are the recovery of the available blood, the collection of a control sample in a tested area not exhibiting chemiluminescence and the complete drying of the support used for blood collection…” &nbsp;Mrs. Kuhl also&nbsp;devised a test for fetal hemoglobin (Hb F). &nbsp;The scientific questions surrounding the <a href="http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/not_guilty/chamberlain2/3.html" target="_blank">Hb F test</a> are outside the scope of the present blog entry.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Gregory Taylor</b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.nacdl.org/champion.aspx?id=20606" target="_blank">&nbsp;Mike Klinkosum</a> wrote an article about the Gregory Taylor case in North Carolina, and how a number of cases of problematic blood forensics were uncovered in an audit. "What was not disclosed at Taylor’s trial was that NCSBI Agent Deaver had only provided the positive results from a presumptive test for blood known as a phenolphthalein [Kastle-Meyer] test. He had withheld from his official laboratory report the fact that he performed a confirmatory test (called a Takayama test) on the two stains that returned negative results for blood as to both substances...Agent Deaver had performed a third test on one of the suspected stains, a species origin determination test (referred to as the Ouchterlony test), designed to determine if the stain was human blood. He received a negative reaction on that test as well, but withheld the results of the Ouchterlony test from his official laboratory report."<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.bulletpath.com/2011/the-unraveling-part-2-ascld-defends-the-indefensible-in-north-carolina/" target="_blank">Amy Driver</a> reported on the aftermath of the Taylor exoneration. "Jill Spriggs, Chief of the Bureau of Forensic Sciences for the California Department of Justice and the President-Elect of ASCLD, responded [to a question at a hearing of the North Carolina state legislature] 'That is an accurate statement. A lot of times you got no results. It didn’t mean it wasn’t blood; it meant you didn’t have enough sample, or maybe the sample was old. …What else is red-brown that will give you a positive presumptive test for blood? There’s nothing that I know.'" This is a remarkable statement. Plant peroxidases are one source of false positive reactions, and <a href="http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Applied_Science_BTEC_Nationals/Chemical_Laboratory_Techniques/Kastle-Meyer" target="_blank">rust</a>is another.&nbsp; With respect to most crimes, animal blood is also a false positive.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Mr. Klinkosum summarized four categories of wrongdoing with respect to how tests for the presence of blood were reported. He quoted the <a href="http://www.ncids.com/forensic/sbi/Swecker_Report.pdf" target="_blank">Swecker-Wolf report</a> on the fourth category: &nbsp;"The fourth and most serious category involves cases in which the reported actual results of the confirmatory tests were over-reported or not reflective of the results contained in the lab notes. There were five such cases in this category, all handled by [Special Agent Duane] Deaver.3 One of these cases involved a defendant who was executed. In two instances, the words 'revealed the presence of blood' were used when in fact the results of the confirmatory test were reflected in the notes as negative. This language was only used by Analysts when the presence of blood was confirmed by a positive confirmatory test. In three instances the report stated that further tests were 'inconclusive' or 'failed to give any result' when the lab notes reflect negative results. It should be noted that the Analyst, SA Deaver, advised reviewers that he was trained that confirmatory tests had only two possible results, negative or positive. SA Deaver’s lab files, however, revealed these two instances in which SA Deaver used the words ‘inconclusive’ in connection with Takayama test results despite his notes reflecting a negative result in one cases (sic) and three tests and three negative results in other cases."</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The problems at North Carolina’s SBI laboratory go beyond one special agent, however. <i>The Raleigh News and Observer</i><span style="font-style: normal;"> <a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/08/20/636932/ex-sbi-analyst-defends-withholding.html#ixzz1LFW05knz" target="_blank">reported</a>, “Jed Taub, a 30-year veteran of the SBI, said, ’We didn't report the negative result of a confirmatory test because, really, it's misleading,’ said Taub, who now works as a forensic investigator for the Pitt County Sheriff's Office. ‘We couldn't be sure it wasn't blood, so those tests really didn't matter.’’ One might argue that Taylor's case is a different situation from the Knox/Sollecito case discussed more fully below. In the former case, a negative confirmatory result was withheld. In the latter case, the TMB results were withheld until late in the first trial. However, the more general principle in question is whether or not forensic scientists should disclose all test results and let the chips fall where they may.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-layout-grid-align: none; mso-pagination: none; text-autospace: none;">In one of an <a href="http://www.kellyaward.com/mk_award_popup/lockeneff.html" target="_blank">award-winning</a> series of articles at the <i>Raleigh News and Observer</i><span style="font-style: normal;">, Joseph Neff and Mandy Locke <a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/12/26/881887/sbi-in-minority-on-test-results.html#storylink=cpy" target="_blank">wrote</a>, “The phrasing of State Bureau of Investigation lab reports from the 1980s to 2003 caused a lot of ruckus in 2010, raising the question of whether North Carolina's practices that helped prosecutions were common to crime labs across the country.”&nbsp; The executive summary of the 2009 National Academy of Science report “Strengthening<b></b></span>Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward” noted on p. S-15, “<span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT;">The terminology used in reporting and testifying about the results of forensic science investigations must be standardized.”</span> It is unfortunate that the NC SBI laboratory did not adhere to this principle in the Taylor case.&nbsp; "Regardless of how everyone else did it 20 years ago, the current and best practice is to report the results of all tests, just as the [North Carolina] SBI lab does now," [SBI Director Greg] McLeod said.&nbsp; Director McLeod’s comments are suggestive of an improved culture at the SBI lab.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Laurence Lovejoy<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Laurence Lovejoy case from Illinois involves the lack of disclosure of a presumptive test. The <a href="http://caselaw.findlaw.com/il-supreme-court/1349052.html" target="_blank">Illinois State Supreme Court</a> Granted Mr. Lovejoy a new trial. "Despite the positive LCV [leucocrystal violet] test, Camp tested the swab with TMB, a more sensitive and more reliable presumptive test for the presence of blood, as her protocol dictates. The TMB test was negative, indicating that the substance swabbed was not blood." The opinion goes on to state, "The parties do not dispute the facts giving rise to the alleged discovery violation. Both sides agree that Camp did not include her finding that the TMB test produced a false negative, and did not state her reason for the negative TMB test in her report."<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The opinion also stated, "Further, if defendant were made aware of Camp’s conclusion that the TMB test produced a false negative because the LCV used all the hemoglobin in the blood, he could have called an expert to refute this contention during his case in chief, or could have chosen to pursue a different line of defense altogether. Defendant was prejudiced when Camp’s conclusions were revealed for the first time at trial." Earlier in the opinion it was made clear that such an expert indeed existed: "In that motion, defendant stated that Dr. Karl Reich, who holds a degree in molecular biology from the University of California, Los Angeles and Harvard University, was prepared to testify that the TMB test used by Camp is the most sensitive presumptive blood test available; that a negative TMB test strongly suggests that there is no blood in the area tested; and that Camp’s testimony that the LCV consumed the reactive blood components, thus confounding the TMB test, was incorrect."&nbsp; In other words, not knowing that there was a negative TMB test nor knowing what rationale would be offered for its being negative hampered the ability to present a robust defense.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">The luminol-positive areas in the Knox/Sollecito case include two blobs in Filomena’s room, three bare feet in Amanda’s room, three bare feet in the corridor, and one shoe print in the corridor.&nbsp; The two amorphous shapes in Filomena’s room and the shoe print have Meredith and Amanda’s DNA profile, the three prints in Amanda’s room have her profile, and the three bare prints in the corridor have no DNA profile.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">A number of forensic references recommend the use of a colorimetric reagent such as TMB on areas that are luminol- or fluorescein-positive.<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 13pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: Times;">Lisa A. Gefrides and Katherine E. Welch wrote,&nbsp; </span>“Either luminol or fluorescein can be sprayed onto large surfaces such as walls or floors and the positive areas areas marked for further testing. Both tests are very sensitive and will indicate bloodstains that may not be visible…One disadvantage to these tests is that both can have false positive reactions. Luminol and fluorescein will react with the same false positives as PH [phenolphthalein] and also with bleach and other cleaning fluids, which may interfere with blood detection on surfaces that have been cleaned. For this reason fluorescein or luminol positive areas should be retested with one of the color change presumptive tests.”&nbsp; (“Serology and DNA” in “The Forensic Laboratory Handbook Procedures and Practice,” Humana Press, 2006) Stuart H. James and William G. Eckert wrote, “After any positive reaction with luminol, the stained area should be circled with a grease pencil or other suitable marker. The stained area should be checked again with another reagent for blood such as tetramethybenzidine (TMB), phenolphthalein, or o-tolidine.” &nbsp;(p. 162, “Interpretation of Bloodstain Evidence at Crime Scenes,” 2<sup>nd</sup> ed., CRC Press, 1998) <o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">A technical bulletin on <a href="http://www.forensicssource.com/UserFiles/Documents/Product/Technical%20Note%20-%20Lightning%20Luminol.pdf" target="_blank">Lightning Luminol</a> said, “Luminol is only a presumptive test and should be used in conjunction with a second field presumptive test and followed by laboratory analysis if sufficient amounts of staining are detected…A second presumptive field test should be used on the areas that were detected positive with Luminol. Results should not be reported as a positive presence for blood, only positive indications of blood. It is recommended that laboratory testing, if possible, be followed on staining areas detected at scenes.”&nbsp; In “The forensic luminol test for blood: unwanted interference and the effect on subsequent analysis,” <a href="http://www.imprimus.net/PDF%20Files/Downloadable%20Files%20Page/Luminol%20Test%20for%20Blood%20-%20Interference%20and%20Effect%20on%20Analysis.pdf" target="_blank">Anders Nilsson</a> of the Swedish National Laboratory of Forensic Science wrote, “<span style="font-family: Times-Roman;">Due to the lower selectivity of the luminol test positive reactions should be verified by other presumptive blood tests like the phenolphthalein test [James, S.H., Kish, P.E. and Sutton, T.P., <i>Principle of bloodstain pattern analysis: theory and practice, </i></span><span style="font-family: Times-Roman;">2005 CRC press Taylor &amp; Francis Group, ISBN 978-1-8493-2014-9].”</span>&nbsp; Although one group of workers (“Accuracy, Reliability, and Safety of Luminol in Bloodstain Investigation,” Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal <b>35</b><span style="font-weight: normal;">&nbsp;(3), September 2002, 113-121) has suggested putting an end to the practice of following luminol with a colorimetric test, it would seem that many laboratories do use the TMB or the Kastle-Meyer test on luminol-positive areas.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The fact that some or all of the luminol-positive areas had been tested using TMB with negative results did not emerge until Sarah Gino’s testimony in September of 2009, near the end of the first trial. The Massei report stated, “With respect to the Luminol-positive traces found in Romanelli's room, in Knox's room and in the corridor, she stated that by analysing the SAL cards ‘we learn, in contradiction to what was presented in the technical report deposited by the Scientific Police, and also to what was said in Court, that not only was the Luminol test performed on these traces, but also the generic diagnosis for the presence of blood, using tetramethylbenzidine...and this test...gave a negative result on all the items of evidence from which it was possible to obtain a genetic profile…’” (pp. 256-257, English translation)<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">There has been much discussion about whether or not the luminol-positive evidence items in the Knox/Sollecito case are blood. &nbsp;I&nbsp;will outline six reasons&nbsp;to be skeptical of the notion that the greater sensitivity<span style="font-weight: normal;"> of luminol is the explanation for why the TMB test was negative for luminol-positive areas in this case:<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">There are substances in some of the photographs of the application of luminol that give off a blue glow, as posted in these threads. There were blue flecks on a ruler, on a pair of boots worn by someone within the forensic police, and on the grouting between tiles.&nbsp; The technical bulletin for Luminol Lightning noted that, “Luminol can give a low grade reaction with some carpet materials.” False positive reactions are seen with many substances besides bleach.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">The technical notes for <a href="http://www.forensicssource.com/UserFiles/Documents/Product/Technical%20Note%20-%20Lightning%20Luminol.pdf" target="_blank">Luminol Lightning</a> caution, “Also, tracking through an area that has been sprayed with Luminol will produce brighter shoe tracks. These tracks can be transferred to other parts of a crime scene. Care should be taken not misinterpret these reactions.”&nbsp; This might explain the luminol-positive areas in Filomena’s room; however, whether the hallway or Filomena’s room were sprayed first is unknown.&nbsp; Alternatively, one can speculate that the luminol-positive areas in Filomena’s room were the result of foot traffic carrying an unknown substance between 2 November and 18 December, when the luminol was applied.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Ranges of values for the sensitivities for both the luminol test and the TMB test have been reported in the forensic literature. Some values suggest that luminol test slightly more sensitive, but I have seen claims that both tests can detect blood that is diluted up to 1 part in 1,000,000. However, let us assume for the purposes of illustration that TMB detects blood to 1 part in 10,000 and that luminol detects blood to one part in 100,000, a tenfold difference in sensitivity<span style="font-weight: normal;">. However, there is a 10,000 fold range (from undiluted blood to blood that has been diluted ten thousand fold) in which both will be positive. In other words each and every dilution would have to be between 10,000- and 100,000-fold to be TMB-negative and luminol-positive in this hypothetical situation.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">Some of the luminol-positive areas were also negative for DNA.&nbsp; Luminol has a slight negative effect on how much DNA can be culled from a sample, and this depends on the formulation. However, it is certainly not the case that the use of luminol precludes testing for DNA. Moreover some luminol-positive areas did have Amanda’s DNA, so we know that luminol does not always interfere with DNA profiling. So if the luminol reaction were responding to Meredith’s blood, why is there none of Meredith’s DNA in some items of evidence and no DNA at all in others?<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">If the only reason why TMB would be negative when luminol was positive is the lesser sensitivity<span style="font-weight: normal;">of TMB relative to luminol, then there would be no reason whatsoever to follow a luminol test with a TMB. A negative TMB would not be meaningful, and a positive TMB is still not a true confirmatory test. According to the Massei report (p. 258, English translation), Sarah Gino testified about the use of TMB: “She added that, in her own experience, analyses performed with TMB on traces revealed by Luminol give about even results: 50% negative, 50% positive…” This observation suggests that the purpose of the TMB test in the field is to reduce the number of false positives, as also seems to be true based on the citations above. This interpretation is also consistent with Stefanoni’s testimony about the nature of the TMB test, as discussed in the Hellmann report: “Professor Tagliabracci, specified, without being refuted (hearing of July 18 2009, p. 174), that the tetramethylbenzedine (TMB) test is very sensitive, so much as to give a positive result even with only five red blood cells present. Dr. Stefanoni herself, moreover, clarified (preliminary hearing of October 4 2008) that, while a positive test result could be deceptive due to reactivity of the chemical [evidenziatore] with other substances, a negative result gives certainty that no blood is present.”<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">As blood is made more dilute, the luminol reaction becomes <a href="http://www.abacusdiagnostics.com/Detecting_Burnt_Bloodstain_Samples_with_Light_Emitting_Blood_Enhancement_Reagents.pdf" target="_blank">fainter</a>. There is no evidence to suggest that these luminol reactions were especially faint.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Conclusions<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">A theme in at least three of these cases is that the forensic personnel have an implicit or explicit belief that a positive result in a presumptive blood test means that blood is really present and a corollary belief that any negative results in subsequent presumptive or confirmatory testing is the result of a failure in the follow-up test.&nbsp; Putting it another way, the Knox/Sollecito case is not unique with respect to its misinterpreted presumptive tests for blood.&nbsp; It is an open question whether or not the false beliefs would change if forensic laboratories were made more autonomous from prosecutor’s offices or law enforcement.&nbsp; This is recommendation 4 in the 2009 National Academy of Science report “Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward.”&nbsp; Both the <a href="http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12589.html" target="_blank">full report</a> and an <a href="http://www.theiai.org/current_affairs/nas_executive_summary_20090218.pdf" target="_blank">executive summary</a> are available.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 11px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Times;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal">In the Chamberlain case, personnel from the forensic laboratory made statements about presumptive test that were false.&nbsp; They destroyed plates that involved the HbF testing before the defense had a chance to examine them.&nbsp; In both the Taylor and Lovejoy cases, the state's failure to disclose the test results was simply wrong.&nbsp; Likewise in the Knox/Sollecito case it was wrong for Ms. Stefanoni to fail to disclose her negative TMB results prior to the trial.&nbsp; Even when these results become available to the defense during the trial, this may be too late for the defense to adapt its strategy to the new information.<o:p></o:p></div>Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com47tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-88283667193494082482012-07-01T16:12:00.001-04:002012-07-07T17:06:14.724-04:00The time of death in the murder of Meredith Kercher<br /><div class="MsoNormal">Part 33 in the Knox/Sollecito case<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Introduction<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">The time of death (TOD) in the murder of Meredith Kercher is a central part of the question of whether Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito participated in her murder.&nbsp; Ms. Popovic saw Ms. Knox around 8:40 PM acting normally.&nbsp; If the TOD is between 9 and 10 PM on 1 November 2007, then it is difficult to imagine how they could have imbibed drugs or alcohol, met Rudy and initiated events leading to murder in the 80 minutes that followed.&nbsp; Let us examine the TOD primarily using the physiology of digestion.&nbsp; This topic was recently discussed at the pro-guilt website, <a href="http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/considering_the_sad_and_sensitive_but_also_crucial_subject_of_meredith/">True Justice for Meredith Kercher</a>, and I am grateful to its author for reminding us of the sensitive nature of this topic. &nbsp;I am also grateful to the translators of the Massei-Cristiani Report and the Hellmann-Zanetti report.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><br /><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Meredith’s friends’ descriptions of the meal<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">As summarized in the English translation of the Massei report (pp. 34-38), Robyn Butterworth was not sure about when the young women ate pizza on 1 November but thought that might have been around 6 PM.&nbsp; They stopped watching the movie, “The Notebook” long enough to put the dessert, apple crumble, into the oven, according to John Follain's book, "Death in Perugia," p. 54.&nbsp; Amy Frost thought that the time of the meal was 5:30 or 6 PM.&nbsp; Sophie Purton thought that the time of the end of the meal was perhaps an hour before leaving, which would mean that they finished desert around 7:45.&nbsp; According to Candace Dempsey’s book, Murder in Italy, Sophie Purton said that Meredith ate only part of her pizza.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Judicial estimates of Meredith’s time of death<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">Massei and Cristiani, the professional judges in the first trial, put the time of death as a few minutes after 11:30 PM (p. 382).&nbsp; Follain (Death in Perugia, p. 344) reported that PM Mignini estimated the time of as between 11:20 and 12 midnight.&nbsp;&nbsp;A summary of&nbsp;Raffaele’s <a href="http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/appeal4.html">appeal document</a> suggests a TOD of 9:30-10:00.&nbsp; <a href="http://hellmannreport.wordpress.com/contents/reasons-for-the-decision/time-of-death/">Hellmann and Zanetti</a>, the professional judges in the second trial, put the time of death as no later than 10:13 PM.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Gastric emptying times<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">The contents of Meredith’s stomach had a volume of 500 mL, and her duodenum was empty (Massei, p. 115).&nbsp; Two time periods are commonly used to measure the first portion of digestion.&nbsp; The time at which food begins to leave the stomach and enter the duodenum is t(lag).&nbsp; The time it takes for the stomach to empty by half is t(1/2).&nbsp; Because Meredith’s duodenum was empty, the more useful number is t(lag), not t(1/2).&nbsp; The time between the start of Meredith’s last meal and the TOD must be less than t(lag).&nbsp; In some of his comments Judge Massei seems to be concerned with t(1/2) or perhaps the time it take for the stomach to empty completely.&nbsp; Yet he also wrote (p. 115), “<b>Dr. Lalli also took into consideration the state of digestion</b><span style="font-weight: normal;">. He stated that solids are ingested into the stomach and are not able to reach the pyloric sphincter until they are reduced to a semi-fluid or fluid consistency; the emptying of the stomach then begins to occur when some of the contents have become sufficiently fluid to reach the pylorus, which happens the third or fourth hour after eating. This is when one can find food material at the level of the duodenum (page 63 of the Lalli report).</span><span style="font-size: 11.5pt;">”&nbsp; This is significantly longer than the average or median values of t(lag) of which I am aware, and it may be that Judge Massei simply misunderstood Dr. Lalli’s report or did not clearly understand the distinctions among the various measures of gastric emptying</span>.&nbsp; A website at Colorado State University on the pathophysiology of the <a href="http://www.vivo.colostate.edu/hbooks/pathphys/digestion/basics/transit.html">digestive system</a> shows the differences among t(lag), t(1/2), and the time for complete emptying.&nbsp; These values are about 80, 150, and 220 minutes, respectively in this diagram.</div><div class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></div><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">A <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12519222">2003 study</a> by Chen <i>et al.</i><span style="font-style: normal;"> (J. Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 18, 41-46) determined a value of t(lag), namely 81.9 ± 17.4 minutes, with a range of 37.1 to 117.8 minutes.&nbsp; The authors described the test meal:&nbsp; “The egg [one yolk and two whites] was ingested with two slices of white bread coated with 7 g of margarine and 8 g of grape jelly, followed by 150mL water.”&nbsp; A <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17074022">paper</a> on gastric emptying times (Hellmig </span><i>et al</i><span style="font-style: normal;">., "Gastric emptying time of fluids and solids in healthy subjects determined by 13C breath tests: influence of age, sex and body mass index" Volume 21, Issue 12, pages 1832–1838, Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, December 2006), was published in the <a href="http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0815-9319">Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology</a>, which is peer-reviewed. Other articles cited this paper at least 25 times.&nbsp; These workers described their test meal:&nbsp; “After addition of 50 mL of low-fat milk, the egg was scrambled and fried in a pan. The solid test meal was completed by a piece of brown bread (50 g) and butter (20 g).”&nbsp; They showed that t(lag) for a solid meal did not follow a normal distribution.&nbsp; The median time was 82 minutes, with the 25% percentile at 66 min. and the 75% percentile at 102 min. Out of 82 subjects (Figure 1D), the longest value was 200 minutes, and the next longest was 170 minutes (each value corresponded to a single individual).<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-style: normal;"><br /></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-style: normal;"> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal">If one uses 6:30 as an estimate for when Meredith began to eat, then 9:50 (200 minutes after 6:30) is a working estimate of the outermost reasonable time at which Meredith was still alive. In fact, the meal may have started earlier than 6:30, given the testimony of Meredith’s friends.&nbsp; The problem for the prosecution does not get much better if one assumes that Meredith <i>began</i><span style="font-style: normal;"> her meal at 7:45 (when the desert was finished, according to Ms. Purton) and uses 200 minutes as the longest possible t(lag).&nbsp; This assumption puts the latest reasonable TOD at 10:55 PM.&nbsp; However, this TOD is far less likely than (for example) 9:05 PM, which is 80 minutes after 7:45.&nbsp; In other words, there is no possible time for Meredith to have consumed her last meal that favors Judge Massei’s TOD over a TOD between 9 and 10 PM.&nbsp;&nbsp;</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-style: normal;"> </span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Other indications of Meredith’s time of death<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">The Hellman-Zanetti report did not attempt to use stomach/duodenum physiology to ascertain the TOD.&nbsp; However, these judges did use other means to reach a similar conclusion.&nbsp; Meredith attempted to call her mother around 8:56 but was unsuccessful.&nbsp; Meredith called her mother once a day; therefore, it would be odd that she did not call back in the period in which she was supposed to have been alone in the prosecution’s scenario.&nbsp; Later there were two activities in close succession, namely an aborted call at 9:58 to Meredith’s answering machine and one at 10:00 PM to Meredith’s bank, but without the country code, neither of which is a complete call.&nbsp; Finally at 10:13 there is a GPRS internet connection for 9 seconds.&nbsp; The summary of Raffaele’s appeal document notes that the tower that handled this interaction can reach both the apartment and the location at which the phones were finally found.&nbsp; It is difficult to see why Meredith would have initiated any of these three later activities herself.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal">It is strange that Meredith did not try to call her mother after her attempt at 8:56 did not succeed.&nbsp; Nor did she call, text, or email anyone else after she arrived home, presumably close to 9 PM.&nbsp; She did not change into night garments or remove clothing from a washing machine.&nbsp; The Hellmann court put the TOD at 10:13 at the latest, and yet the evidence suggests that the TOD might have been earlier even without bringing in the physiology of gastric emptying.<o:p></o:p></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b>Conclusions<o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal">The cell phone data suggest that Meredith died no later than 10:13 PM, as Judges Hellmann and Zanetti indicated. It is undisputed that there was activity on Raffaele’s computer at 9:08 PM, and the defense argued that there was activity at 9:26 and that the screensaver log files indicate additional activity.&nbsp; Even by itself, the lack of material in the duodenum strongly suggests that the time of death was likely to be earlier even than 10:13.&nbsp; Therefore, there was not enough time for Raffaele and Amanda supposedly to become very messed up from alcohol and/or drugs, to meet Rudy Guede, and to initiate a long series of actions that culminates in murder.&nbsp; It is likely that Meredith was attacked shortly after returning home, probably between 9 and 9:30.<o:p></o:p></div>Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com80tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-87609493432233463202011-11-04T11:00:00.006-04:002011-11-06T18:50:32.516-05:00Hank Skinner, the death penalty, and investigative tunnel vision<!--StartFragment--> <p class="MsoNormal"><!--StartFragment--> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Update I, 5 November 2011<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/02/hank-skinner-part-ix-uncle-robert.html#comment-form">Skeptical Juror</a> wrote, "The hairs found clasped in Twila’s hand, the hairs pronounced by the DA to belong to the killer, turned out to come from a male, maternal relative of Twila. They did not come from Hank Skinner. According to the standard set by the DA before the testing, those hairs exonerated Hank Skinner." Twila's uncle had stalked her the night of her murder. The DNA testing described appears to be mitochondrial DNA forensics (one inherits mitochondrial DNA from one's mother). My tentative interpretation of the mitochondrial DNA is that the data tend toward innocence but are not yet conclusive. As others have said, I am not certain Mr. Skinner is innocent, but I cannot see a persuasive reason not to test the items in question.</p><p class="MsoNormal">***********************</p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal">The state of Texas is trying to put Hank Skinner to death for the murder of a family of three people.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>DNA testing showed that blood smears on his shirt matched two of the victims.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>Mr. Skinner was undoubtedly at the scene of the crime, but his mental and physical state at the time open the question of whether or not he would have been capable of committing murder.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>A recent Texas law was designed <a href="http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2011/10/why-does-texas-ag-continue-to-fight-dna.html">to apply to this case</a>, to allow further DNA testing.<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Radley Balko has been following the case of Hank Skinner for some time.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><a href="http://reason.com/archives/2010/02/22/is-texas-about-to-execute-anot">Writing for </a><i><a href="http://reason.com/archives/2010/02/22/is-texas-about-to-execute-anot">Reason</a></i> Balko noted, “In 2000 DNA tests were conducted on blood taken from a roll of gauze and a cassette tape found in the house; that blood didn't match Skinner, his girlfriend, or her sons.”<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>At Huffington Post <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/radley-balko/hank-skinner-texas-death-row_b_1072707.html">he wrote</a>, “There is DNA from the crime scene that could exonerate Skinner -- or could affirm his guilt -- that has never been tested. That includes blood from the murder weapon, blood from a jacket left in Busby's home, a rape kit taken from Busby, scrapings from under Busby's fingernails and hairs she was clutching at the time of her death -- hairs that likely came from her killer.”<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The State of Texas has argued that since Skinner’s attorney at the time did not press for testing these items.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>Radley Balko continued, "’They only tested the material they thought would implicate Skinner,’ [Professor David] Protess told me <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2010/06/certain_knowledge.html">in an interview last year</a>. ‘They fixated on their suspect, and once they thought they had enough for a conviction, they stopped.’” Private investigation several years after the crime turned up a second plausible suspect.<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Students of the Knox/Sollecito case should be especially troubled by investigatorial tunnel vision.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>In the first place, there are good reasons to question the competency of Skinner’s first attorney, apart from his decision not to seek testing.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>Second, his attorney’s decision was contrary to the wishes of Mr. Skinner, as he expressed in a letter in 1994.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>Third, the whole issue of whether or not the attorney should have sought testing is misdirection:<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>the investigators should have tested these items as a matter of good forensic science.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>Here is a <a href="http://www.change.org/petitions/withdraw-execution-warrant-and-grant-dna-testing-to-hank-skinner-2?alert_id=TyDHGLiJkI_qFsnTuGScd&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=action_alert">link</a> to a petition for full DNA testing.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><o:p></o:p></p> <!--EndFragment-->Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-75159266854450448372011-09-22T21:16:00.012-04:002011-09-22T22:45:39.783-04:00Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: There is no mixed blood<span style="font-weight:bold;">Part 32 in the Knox/Sollecito case<br /></span><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Introduction</span><br />The <a href="http://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/">Conti-Vecchiotti report</a> casts further doubt upon the reliability of the bra clasp and the kitchen knife, two of the strongest, yet seriously flawed, pieces of evidence against Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito in this case. With the appeals trial expect to wrap up shortly, it is time to reexamine the strength of the other biological evidence against them, especially the mixed DNA traces. An anonymous <a href="http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php?/tjmk/comments/beyond_massei_on_the_seemingly_insuperable_mixed_blood_evidence/">pro-guilt blogger</a> did so several months ago. The related question of whether or not the luminol-positive areas (some of which had DNA profiles) were truly blood was the subject of a <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2011/07/forensic-tests-for-presence-of-blood.html">previous entry</a> here and a discussion at L<a href="http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2011/04/08/amanda-knox-bloody-footprints-tested-negative-for-blood/">et’s Talk about True Crime.</a><br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Which samples contained mixed DNA?</span><br />There are two amorphous, luminol-positive spots in Filomena’s room (Reps. 176 and 177), although the alleles which may be Amanda’s are quite weak. There is a shoe print in the hallway (Rep. 183). In the shared bathroom there is a sample from the bidet drain, the cotton flock container on the floor, and from the inside of the washbasin (Rep. 137). There is no DNA from Amanda in the murder room, either by itself or mixed with Meredith’s DNA.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Did the jury in the first trial find the mixed DNA to be significant?</span><br />Barbie Nadeau wrote, "The defense's biggest mistake, according to interviews with jurors after the trial, was doing nothing to refute the mixed-blood evidence beyond noting that it is common to find mingled DNA when two people live in the same house. The jurors needed more than that. 'To have mixed blood, you have to both be bleeding,' one of them remarked to me after the verdict. It was obvious that Meredith was bleeding, but why was Amanda bleeding?'" ("Angel Face," pages 152-153)<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Does mixed DNA indicate mixed blood?</span><br />The passage quoted above implies that at least one juror thought that the two were equivalent, but this is a fallacy. There are three possibilities with respect to mixed DNA and blood: neither source, one source, or both sources of DNA could be blood. A commonly repeated fallacy of this case is to equate a mixture of DNA with a mixture of blood (to assume possibility three). For example in a recent <a href="http://www.sbs.com.au/dateline/story/transcript/id/601316/n/Justice-on-Trial">Dateline broadcast</a> Barbie Nadeau said, “I have to say, I live in a house with 3 people, my two sons and my husband, I guarantee you I have no mixed blood with any of them, anywhere in my house. I don't bleed where they bleed, we don't bleed at the same time. There would never be my mixed blood, their blood and my blood anywhere ever.”<br /><br />The false equivalence between mixed DNA and mixed blood dates back at least to the publication of the book Darkness Descending. In this book Colonel Luciano Garofano, a retired officer of the Carabinieri, said, “However, here is the electropherogram and you can see that the RFU value is very high, so the sample is undoubtedly blood, which is the body fluid that provides the greatest amount of DNA. In some cases you see higher peaks of Amanda's DNA than Meredith's. Amanda has been bleeding. Nor is it old blood, as the defence might say, because blood decays fast. We have the same result on the cotton-bud box. The light switch was over-scrubbed, but from the film the way the cotton-bud was good enough. There too we have mixed blood. So that's pretty significant for Amanda, Unfortunately for her, she bled at the same time Meredith was bleeding. That's a lot to explain." (Darkness Descending, page 371).<br /><br />There are several reasons why Garofano’s interpretations are wrong. In response to a question of mine, Professor Dan Krane wrote, “Inferring tissue source from peak heights is just plain silly -- to the point of being absolutely outrageous. It hardly bears more comment than that, but if high peaks mean blood then what would you expect from semen which has a ten to one hundred fold higher concentration of DNA?” Professor Greg Hampikian concurred with the view that peak heights were not an indication of whether or not blood was the source of DNA. The peak heights for Raffaele’s profile on the cigarette butt were reported to me as being about the same height as those on the cotton box, and the former are presumably from saliva.<br /><br />Colonel Garofano’s claim that the DNA from blood decays quickly is difficult to evaluate. A <a href="http://www.hartnell.cc.ca.us/faculty/jhughey/Files/ftacardstrs.pdf">paper</a> (Park et al., “Direct STR Amplification from Whole Blood and Blood- or Saliva-Spotted FTA without DNA Purification,” J. Forensic Sci., March 2008, Vol. 53, No. 2, 335-41) showed that 1-2 year-old blood samples gave strong signals in DNA profiling when stored in the form of<a href="http://www.dnatestingcentre.com/FTA_cards.htm"> FTA cards</a> (which contain stabilizers); therefore, their study does not exactly refute what Colonel Garofano claimed, but it does not support his claim, either. However, this paper also showed that saliva gave tall peaks in DNA profiling, which is one more indication that peak height cannot be used to infer the biological origin of a sample. The rate of decay of a DNA sample depends upon so many factors that dating DNA by its degradation is not practical. Furthermore, even if one were to accept that DNA peaks from blood did degrade very quickly, one might have to conclude that the luminol-positive, mixed-DNA samples were not blood, inasmuch as the luminol was applied on 18 December, more than a month and a half after the crime.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">What did Massei conclude with respect to the mixed DNA samples?</span><br />In contrast to the juror quoted above, the Massei report did not assume that mixed DNA was equivalent to mixed blood (pp. 278-279, English Translation). “It should then be highlighted that in that same bathroom various [300] trace specimens were found, of a mixed nature and testing positively for blood. It is true that, according to what was asserted and explained, it is not possible with a mixed trace specimen that tested positive for human blood to determine which of the trace’s contributors the blood belongs to. In this case, however, non-mixed traces were also found, which were shown to be of a haematological nature [i.e. blood] and turn out to have the biological profile of the victim.” The report continued (p. 279), “And it is probable - not necessary, but probable - that during the following act of scrubbing the hands to remove the blood, he/she left the mixed trace consisting of Meredith’s blood and of cells which had been removed by rubbing during the act of washing.” <br /><br />The Massei motivations report acknowledged that Amanda had no wounds and therefore was not bleeding. It also noted that DNA by itself gives no indication of when it was deposited (see below). In summary Massei thought that the mixed DNA did not necessarily indicate mixed blood, but he believed that the traces were deposited simultaneously, at least partially on the basis of Amanda’s declaring that the bathroom was clean on the afternoon of 1 November. Such a position is problematic in that a clean bathroom does not necessarily imply a DNA-free bathroom. Moreover, there is no reason to rule out Amanda’s depositing the DNA on the morning after the crime in addition to the possibility that she deposited it before the crime. <br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Does mixed DNA have to be deposited at the same time?</span><br />In general the presence of DNA almost never gives an indication of how or when it was deposited. The <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16046091">abstract</a> of an article (“DNA profiling of trace DNA recovered from bedding,” Forensic Science International, Volume 159, Issue 1, 25 May 2006, Pages 21-26) on DNA profiling states in part: “The results indicate that the DNA profile of an individual can be obtained from bedding after one night of sleeping in a bed. The DNA profile of the owner of the bed could also be detected in the foreign bed experiments. Since mixed DNA profiles can be obtained from trace DNA on bedding, caution should be exercised when drawing conclusions from DNA profiling results obtained from such samples.” This is a good example of mixed DNA that <span style="font-style:italic;">could not</span> have been deposited simultaneously.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">How common is mixed DNA?</span><br />Head of the US National Institute of Standards and Technology's genetics group, “[John] Butler has <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727733.500-fallible-dna-evidence-can-mean-prison-or-freedom.html">reviewed</a> more than 5000 DNA samples from 14 US labs and found that mixing is a common occurrence: 34 per cent of the samples he studied included DNA from two people, while 11 per cent were three or four-person mixtures.” Although some fraction of the two-person samples are from the victim and the perpretrator, it is not reasonable to suppose that this is the case for all of them, let alone the three or four-person mixtures.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Are there other mixed DNA samples in this case?</span><br />In addition to the mixed DNA of Meredith and Amanda at the girls’ flat, there are also three <a href="http://www.friendsofamanda.org/mixed_dna.html">mixed DNA samples</a> containing Amanda’s and Raffaele’s DNA at his flat. One was found in Sollecito’s bathroom, one was found in his bedroom, and one was found on a pair of rubber gloves. The former two are also luminol-positive, but the identity of the luminol-reactive substance is not known. All three mixed samples are likely to be the result of cohabitation. Amanda’s and Raffaele’s DNA was also found on a cigarette butt at the girls’ flat (p. 193, Massei Report, English translation). The cigarette butt is also interesting in that some of the peaks comprising Amanda’s profile are moderate in intensity, despite possibly being the result of secondary DNA transfer (Amanda does not smoke cigarettes).<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Do any of the samples contain DNA from a third party?</span><br />Sara Gino’s testimony indicated that in sample 177 in Filomena’s room there were alleles besides those of Meredith and Amanda. I have also examined a copy of the electropherogram. In the D19S433 locus, four alleles are marked: 12, 13, 16, and 16.2, but there are unlabeled alleles at 14 and 15 or 15.2. If one acknowledges that it might have been deposited at some other time than the murder, then one must also acknowledge the same possibility for Amanda's DNA.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Could the forensic team have run controls?</span><br />Besides the issue of how samples were collected in general, the forensic police could have done substrate controls, where they examined areas for DNA that were a few inches away from putative blood stains, as materials scientist <a href="http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/MarkWaterbury-3.html">Dr. Mark Waterbury</a> suggested. If they had found Amanda’s DNA in some of those locations, it would have been suggestive of innocent DNA deposition. <br /><br />They could also have performed or cited studies of DNA deposition in bathrooms, if such studies existed already (I am not aware of any). There are a number of ways that such studies could be performed. For instance, one could take blood from person A and place it in person B’s bathroom, then collect DNA samples. If one found mixed DNA from A and B, it would strengthen the hypothesis that Amanda deposited DNA in the normal course of everyday living. <br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Is there precedent for mixed DNA arising through contamination?</span><br />Many cases of contamination show a mixture of DNA from the analyst and a potential suspect, as discussed in the previous blog entry. One case, the murder of Jane Mixer, showed contamination from two potential suspects, Gary Leiterman and John Ruelas. However, Ruelas was four years old at the time of the murder and lived in a different city. Therefore, this is probably a case in which both profiles arose from contamination.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Could the way the DNA was sampled have resulted in mixed DNA?</span><br />The Massei Motivations report (p. 278, English translation) indicates that the defense thought that the mixed traces were meaningless: “All the more so since the samples had been taken using the same blotting paper which had been used for various parts of the bidet and the sink.” Even Colonel Garofano (a strongly pro-prosecution commentator on the case) was dismayed at the way the washbasin trace was collected, noting, “The fact that the sample was collected by wiping both the edge and the plughole is dangerous. You’re likely to find all sorts of stuff in the plughole.” (p. 370, “Darkness Descending”)<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Did the police take every precaution to avoid contamination?<br /></span>No, there are several ways in which the work could have been improved. Ms. Stefanoni’s view was that liquid samples are liable to cross-contamination, but dry traces are not. In the English translation of the Massei report (p. 203) it says that Stefanoni “specified” that gloves were changed “every time an object was touched that was particularly soaked with blood, and when it was obvious that the gloves would be soiled;” On pages 204-205 she indicated that the presence of a liquid is necessary to bring about contamination by touch.<br /><br />Ms. Stefanoni’s view is out of the mainstream. On page 38 of John Butler's textbook “Forensic DNA Typing,” he wrote, “Use clean latex gloves for collecting each item of evidence. Gloves should be changed between handling of different items of evidence.” At Forensic Magazine in the article “<a href="http://www.forensicmag.com/article/evidence-handling-and-collection?page=0,0">Evidence Handling and Collection</a>” Dick Warrington wrote, “Go about collecting evidence. I can’t say enough about avoiding cross contamination. Put on gloves, use gloves, change gloves. Do that every time you touch a piece of evidence. Likewise, use disposable tweezers, scalpels, etc. Change these each time they are used, as well.” Warrington also wrote an article for Forensic Magazine called “<a href="http://www.forensicmag.com/article/dna-collection-and-packaging">DNA Collection and Packaging</a>,” that discussed the use of gloves and tweezers to avoid contamination. <a href="http://www.orchidcellmark.com/forensicdna/evidencehandling.html">Orchid Cellmark’s</a> guidelines state, “Use clean latex gloves for collecting each item of evidence. It is recommended the gloves be changed between the collection of each item of evidence.” If the police handled an item of evidence with Amanda’s DNA then handled an item with Meredith’s DNA, the glove could carry Amanda’s DNA into the other sample.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Are there innocent explanations for the mixed DNA in Filomena’s room?</span><br />The luminol work that first identified some of the areas that later were shown to contain mixed DNA traces was performed on December 18, 2007. By this time many police personnel had been in the girls’ flat, and many of Meredith’s items had been tossed about. This raises the possibility that the forensic police tracked the genetic material of either Knox or Kercher into Filomena’s room from the hall. The forensic police who were recorded on 18 December wore one-piece <a href="http://www.indutexspa.com/index.asp?lang=2&id_head=49&id_father=531">tyvek garments</a> but did not appear to have any outer shoe covering. Former FBI agent <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSf4KWHvOEo">Steve Moore</a> noted that they did not change shoe covers going from one room to another that that this creates the potential for cross-contamination. This is especially worrisome in that several members of the team are quite close to the dried bloodstains in Meredith’s room, as can be seen in parts 10 and 11 of a <a href="http://www.oggi.it/focus/attualita/2011/08/05/delitto-di-perugia-in-esclusiva-il-video-integrale-del-ritrovamento-del-gancetto-del-reggiseno-di-meredith/">series of videos</a> taken on 18 December 2007.<br /><br />In addition the luminol-positive spots are only presumptive blood; these tested negative by tetramethylbenzidine, a second type of presumptive test, and there is no record of confirmatory blood testing. Therefore, it is open to debate whether or not the luminol-positive substance is even blood. One photograph of the luminol-positive footprints in the hallway also show blue specks on the ruler and on the boot of one of the forensic police officers. It is unclear what the luminol-positive substance was in this case, or whether it could have contaminated other items of evidence.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Conclusions</span><br />Mixed DNA is commonly observed and is not equivalent to mixed blood. In general DNA samples cannot be dated, and any two profiles within a sample may have been deposited at different times. The mixed DNA in the bathroom may have been created by Meredith's blood falling on Amanda's biological matter that was already there. The chances of this happening might have been lessened if the forensic police had taken a smaller trace with respect to the washbasin, for example. Dirty gloves or dropped swabs (which happened elsewhere) made have mixed DNA during collection. The police or the inhabitants of the flat may have tracked Meredith's blood into Filomena's room. The evidentiary value of these mixed DNA samples is very low.Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com29tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-33790889398077759662011-09-04T13:07:00.020-04:002015-03-24T09:42:34.416-04:00The likelihood of DNA contamination<span style="font-weight: bold;">Part 31 in the Knox/Sollecito case </span><br /><br />The subject of DNA contamination has been a frequent <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/05/secondary-transfer-of-dna-and-dna.html">topic</a> of this blog. DNA contamination is again near the forefront of the Kercher murder and the second trial of Amanda Knox and Sollecito. The court-appointed, independent experts, Drs. Conti and Vecchiotti, have issued a <a href="http://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/">report</a> that raises the strong possibility of contamination. The odds that a forensic DNA sample are contaminated are hard to determine yet very important. Let us first examine a specific statement made with respect to environmental contamination and this case, then look at the question more generally. A subsequent entry will examine the collection practices of the Rome lab and Conti’s and Vecchiotti’s evaluation of their work in this case.<br /><br />Professor Giuseppe Novelli, a researcher into medical genetics and forensic DNA profiling, <a href="http://www.ilmessaggero.it/articolo.php?id=158077&amp;sez=HOME_INITALIA">said</a>, <span style="font-style: italic;">«Il contaminante va dimostrato, dove nasce e dove è. Il gancetto contaminato dalla polvere? Più probabile che cada un meteorite e butti giù questo tribunale»</span> "The contaminant needs to be demonstrated, where it comes from and where it is. The clasp contaminated by dust? It's more likely that a meteorite comes down and knocks down this courthouse." (translation by komponisto)<br /><br />Let us assume that Dr. Novelli is specifically referring to household dust. The potential for dust being an issue in forensic DNA testing first came to light with the publication of a paper from Bonnie Brown and coworkers: Toothman <span style="font-style: italic;">et al.</span>, “Characterization of human DNA in environmental samples,” <span style="font-style: italic;">Forensic Science Internationa</span>l <span style="font-weight: bold;">178</span> (2008) 7–15. These workers sampled dust from offices, research laboratories, and classrooms.<br /><br />Figure 3 in this paper is an electropherogram of dust from a classroom, and it shows peaks of 1000 to 3500 RFU corresponding to 3-6 alleles in some loci associated with shorter pieces of DNA. As the length of the DNA fragments increases (moving from left to right on the elecropherogram), the height of the peaks decreased. The authors point out that this is consistent with DNA template that is partially degraded. The combination of a sample’s being a mixture and its yielding only partial profiles makes it very difficult to identify individual profiles.<br /><br />The authors wrote, “Results of this study have implications regarding the processing of forensic samples. First, the presence of genotypeable human DNA in dust illustrates a significant<br />potential contamination source in forensic investigations. Twenty-five of 36 samples contained sufficient input human DNA for STR analysis using the AmpFlSTR® Profiler PlusTM assay (~1.0 ng), and 36% (including low-input samples) produced alleles at multiple loci. These results demonstrate that even though anti-contamination measures may be in place at a crime scene and the laboratory, trace DNA derived from dust in the vicinity of other evidence is capable of producing signals higher than background noise in STR analyses.”<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Trace DNA and the environment </span><br />Secondary transfer is the movement of DNA from a donor to an intermediate object then to another object from which it is collected. Some forensic scientists only classify it as contamination when it occurs subsequently to the object’s being taken into custody; however, other workers prefer to treat innocent secondary transfer as equivalent to contamination on the basis that neither is relevant to the investigation. Both secondary transfer prior to an object’s being collected and contamination need to be understood more thoroughly for trace DNA to be used routinely in DNA forensics. <a href="http://www.investigativegenetics.com/content/1/1/14">Van Oorschot</a> and colleagues wrote, “Greater effort needs to be made by police/crime investigators to investigate how a DNA sample arrived at the location where it was found, as well as by scientists to better understand the impact of activities on the relative amounts of DNA from particular sources at a crime scene… Some preliminary contributions to our knowledge of transfer in relation to residential burglary and street robbery have recently been made [67].<br /><br />In their review of trace DNA in forensics Van Oorschot and colleagues suggested six remedies to address the problem of contamination:<br />“1. perform more studies similar to those of Raymond et al. [67], Cook and Dixon [202], Dowlman et al. [203] and Toothman et al. [201] in order to learn more about the occurrence and persistence of DNA on particular surfaces in different environmental conditions” Understanding how prevalent and persistent background DNA is in the environment is far from being completely understood. Dr. Novelli declined to comment for this report, but his comparison with a meteorite is premature, at best.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The relationship between DNA sample size and the ease of transfer</span><br />In their 2010 review article <a href="http://www.investigativegenetics.com/content/1/1/14">Van Oorschot and colleagues</a> wrote, “Contaminant DNA may appear as either the major or minor sample within a mixture or, alternatively, may overwhelm the target DNA completely.” One explanation for this somewhat counterintuitive statement is that contamination in the laboratory may introduce DNA from previous PCR amplifications by a number of possible routes. However, the two main DNA profiles of interest (Meredith’s on the knife blade and Raffaele’s putative profile on the bra clasp) both involve relatively small amounts of DNA; therefore, we will focus on small samples.<br /><br />The discussion of low copy number (LCN) testing from the <a href="http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/l_to_o/low_copy_number_dna_testing/#a3">Crown Prosecution Service</a> noted, “This increased sensitivity means ultra-clean laboratories are needed for the testing to minimise contamination of the sample by DNA from any other source.” The New Zealand Institute of Environmental Science and Research has spent $1 million building anticontamination areas for low copy number (LCN) DNA forensics. The <a href="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&amp;objectid=10408000">New Zealand Herald</a> wrote, “The bogey is contamination. The very sensitivity of the technique which enables it to extract a DNA profile from the tiniest sample also makes it extremely vulnerable to contamination. Stringent measures are needed to minimise that risk… We live in a ‘soup’ of DNA, explains ESR forensic programme manager Keith Bedford. ‘If I were to shed dandruff, massive amounts of dna could fall ... hair could carry DNA. The way I am speaking at the moment, we could probably detect DNA on this pad in front of me.’”<br /><br />Sara Gino testified for the defense in the trial of the first instance, and some of what she had to say is pertinent to this issue. From the Massei report (p. 258, English translation): “She reaffirmed that [the risk of] contamination exists, and emphasised that in minimal quantities of DNA there is not necessarily a greater risk of contamination but it was easier to notice the effects of the contamination and be misled (‘...It's not that the risk of contamination is greater; but it is easier to see the contamination...’ page 92).” In response to a question on this subject, Professor Dan Krane responded, “There is absolutely no question but that contamination is a much greater problem in LCN cases than conventional DNA testing. The reasons that it is a greater problem are both because it is easier to detect contaminants ([Sara] Gino's point) and because it is easier to transfer (and to transfer without knowing) smaller amounts of DNA than larger amounts of DNA.”<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Some examples of DNA contamination</span><br /><a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/freed-man-farah-jama-angry-over-rape-dna-bungle/story-e6frg6nf-1225807837386">Farah Jama</a> was a young man accused of rape on the basis of his DNA seemingly being found on the alleged victim. <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/02/farah-jama-and-forensic-dna.html">Mr. Jama</a> is black and at 21 was too young to have entered the club at which the incident occurred, which catered to people over 28. Moreover, the alleged victim did not recall seeing a black man at the club that night. Yet, as <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/dna-in-the-dock/story-e6frg6z6-1225809214024">Milanda Rout</a> wrote, “But the judge and the jury did not buy his alibi, despite supporting evidence from his father, brother and friend. Instead, they believed the forensic scientist who testified there was a one in 800 billion chance that the DNA belonged to someone other than the accused man.” After Mr. Jama spent more that eighteen months in prison, he was released because prosecutors said that they could not rule out contamination. The contamination event may have occurred during two forensic medical examinations, one of the victim and the other of Mr. Jama on an unrelated matter that occurred <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/national/dna-fiasco-rape-conviction-quashed-20091207-kfc3.html">one day earlier</a>.<br /><br />Perhaps the most thoroughly studied case of contamination is that which occurred in the Jaidyn Leskie case. This blog has covered the <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/05/secondary-transfer-of-dna-and-dna.html">Leskie case</a> on two previous <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/06/dna-contamination-and-dna-cold-hits.html">occasions</a>. The DNA of a woman who probably never left her village was found on the clothing of the submerged body of a toddler. She was a mentally challenged woman who may have been raped, which is why her DNA was being examined. Because the woman was such an exceedingly unlikely suspect, the only reasonable explanation was contamination. Contamination has been documented on several occasions when evidence items from unrelated cases are examined within a few days in the same lab.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.au/article/2008/08/09/15303_hpnews.html">Russell John Gesah</a> was charged with the rape and murder of a mother and child. Kathleen Skeen wrote, “A Victorian Police Forensic Services Centre review found clothing with Mr Gesah's DNA from an unrelated offence had been examined on the same day and same surface as clothing from the Tapp case." The Gesah case, and the murders of Jane Mixer and Jane Durrua (see below) are all examples of DNA cold hits. The Gesah case prompted the State of Victoria to reexamine thousands of cases (see below).<br /><br /><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/the-dark-side-of-dna/article1499631/">Gregory Turner</a> might have been convicted of murder on the basis of DNA evidence. However, a forensic worker contaminated a key piece of evidence with his and her DNA. She also acknowledged contamination in two other cases on which she had worked. An interesting aspect of the Turner case is that the DNA from the victim came from her fingernails, and Mr. Turner’s DNA came from his wedding ring. These facts suggest that the presence of liquids is not necessary to bring about cross-contamination, in contrast to the implications of Patrizia Stefanoni’s testimony in the present case.<br /><br />The murder of Jane Mixer was initially attributed to a serial killer. When Gary Leiterman’s DNA was found on the decades-old evidence, he was convicted. However, the presence of the DNA matching then four-year old John Ruelas on the same item of evidence (despite Ruelas’s living in another city) strongly points to this being another example of <a href="http://www.garyisinnocent.org/web/WrongfulConviction/DNAContamination/tabid/70/Default.aspx">contamination</a>. This illustrates another important principle. One does not always know the precise moment that contamination occurred, but one can infer contamination when the direct deposit of DNA is shown to be highly unlikely.<br /><br />A seemingly solved cold case that turned out to be contamination involved the 1968 murder of <a href="http://www.dnalabsinternational.com/email_newsletter/vol_12_feb_06/vol12_ref20.html">Jane Durrua</a>. Jerry Lee Bellamy’s DNA was found when the evidence was tested in 1999. Evidence against <a href="http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090104/NEWS/901040380/-1/rss01">Mr. Bellamy </a>in an unrelated case was tested on the same day as items from the Durrua case. The actual evidence of contamination was not conclusive, but despite this, charges against Mr. Bellamy were dropped. Alleged serial killer <a href="http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/03/paul_seitz_nj_investigator_who.html">Robert Zarinski</a> was later arrested, but he died before he could be tried.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The difficulties in quantifying the frequency of DNA contamination</span><br />Not all labs document contamination events. Some labs argue that contamination that is identified with the use of negative control experiments does not count as contamination. Negative controls will spot wholesale contamination events but will not necessarily catch sporadic contamination. These facts make it difficult to quantify how frequently contamination occurs. However, it does not seem to be an especially rare event. Professor Thompson is a lawyer who specializes in probability theory as it relates to DNA profiling. <a href="http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090104/NEWS/901040380/-1/rss01">Maura Dolan</a> reported that he is among the leading authorities on laboratory errors in the United States. In response to a request from the Los Angeles Times to review the records from some California forensics labs, Thompson said, “’on a regular basis, laboratory personnel make mistakes that could lead to false identifications’ of suspects.” He also indicated that what has emerged in recent years is just “the tip of the iceberg.”<br /><br />In 2008 Professor Thompson wrote an <a href="http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/pageDocuments/H4T5EOYUZI.pdf">article</a>, “The Potential for Error in Forensic DNA Testing (and How That Complicates the Use of DNA Databases for Criminal Identification"). “Doubt was also cast on a number of convictions in Queensland when a forensic scientist who had previously worked for a state forensic laboratory publicly expressed concerns about the reliability of the lab’s work. He told The Australian newspaper that it was not uncommon for the lab to mix up DNA samples from different cases.[62] For example, he said that analysts’ own DNA, from blood samples used as analytical controls, often was mixed up with (or found its way into) casework samples, creating false matches: “[Q]uite often my (colleague) would walk down the aisle and say, ‘I’ve just committed another rape on the Gold Coast.’”[62] The analyst said that while many such errors were caught, sample limitations made it impossible to resample or retest in some questionable cases.” These remarks underscore the notion that DNA contaminations are not a rare event.<br />[62. <a href="http://truthinjustice.org/AussieDNA.htm">A. McDonald</a>, “DNA evidence claim clouds Australian convictions,” The Australian, July 8, 2006.]<br /><br />In response to the Russell John Gesah contamination incident (see above), the Victorian police reexamined their cases involving DNA forensics. During the period from 1988 to 2008 the Victorian police service handled <a href="http://news.smh.com.au/national/vic-police-back-dna-processes-20080807-3rf6.html">7000 cases involving DNA</a>. According to <a href="http://www.watoday.com.au/national/dna-blunder-sinks-kill-trial-20080806-3r6a.html#ixzz1VLJH4PLx">Peter Gregory</a> and coauthors, “In 2003, Mr Scheffer told an inquest on Moe toddler Jaidyn Leskie that since late 1999, 39 cases had been identified as requiring "diagnostic and corrective action", with most involving contamination.<br /><br />Finally, testimony reported by Annabelle McDonald (in <a href="http://truthinjustice.org/AussieDNA.htm">The Australian</a>) implied that mixing up samples is a not uncommon event. Although mislabeling of samples (if that is what mixing up means) is not itself contamination, it has the potential to lead to the same erroneous judicial result. A mislabeling in Nevada was uncovered during an independent review of the <a href="http://www.forensicdna.com/DNAerror.htm">Lazaro Sotolusson</a> case. In addition <a href="http://www.8newsnow.com/story/15051014/project-innocense">Dwayne Jackson</a> was also the victim of a similar mistake at the Las Vegas forensics lab.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Conclusions</span><br />There is not yet enough information on environmental contamination to make conclusive statements about how common environmental contamination is; however, DNA is deposited routinely in all sorts of ways that are unrelated to criminal activity. The authors of a recent study believe that environmental dust can give rise to extra alleles in evidence samples. The frequency of contamination is difficult to quantify, but it is not an especially rare occurrence. The chances of contamination are greater for DNA in the low template range than they are for larger samples. Historical examples of contamination suggest that it is more likely to occur when items of evidence are processed closely in time. Contrary to the implication of Dr. Novelli's remarks, it is rarely the case that the exact mechanism of contamination is proven.Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-55252623824793413472011-07-07T21:34:00.021-04:002011-07-12T17:51:53.761-04:00Forensic tests for the presence of blood<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/files/2011/04/Sink.jpeg"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 230px; height: 320px;" src="http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/files/2011/04/Sink.jpeg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />Part 30 in the Knox/Sollecito case<br />Updated three times (see below)<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Introduction</span><br />Blood has a high proportion of red blood cells that are packed with a protein called hemoglobin but are without DNA. Hemoglobin has a helper molecule called heme, which contains iron, and the iron binds and releases oxygen. Roughly 1 in 800 blood cells is a white blood cell that does not have hemoglobin but does have DNA. The detection of blood is an ongoing problem in forensic science, and advances are continually being made. A <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/03/luminol-and-some-of-footprint-evidence.html">previous entry</a> in this blog also treated luminol.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Presumptive tests</span><br />Two major kinds of presumptive tests are chemiluminescent and chemical. Presumptive tests rely upon the pseudoperoxidase acivity of hemoglobin. Hemoglobin is not an enzyme (catalyst) in its role carrying oxygen, but it can often speed up the reaction of hydrogen peroxide with a reduced molecule. In these tests hemoglobin is mimicking the action of a class of enzymes called peroxidases, thus one refers to the pseudoperoxidase activity of hemoglobin. Peroxidases oxidize organic molecules using peroxides (such as hydrogen peroxide) as the oxidant. Luminol is chemiluminescent, giving off a bluish light in the presence of dilute blood when it is oxidized. Tetramethylbenzidine (TMB) is a chemical test, relying upon a change in color upon oxidation.<br /><br />The murder of Meredith Kercher may have featured a misuse of the Kastle-Meyer test, a presumptive test for blood. The Kastle-Meyer chemical test relies upon hydrogen peroxide oxidizing phenolphthalin, which is colorless, to phenolphthalein, which is pink.<br /> <br />The police released photos (see above) to the press that some observers, such as <a href="http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/06/perugia200806?currentPage=2">Judy Bachrach</a> of <span style="font-style:italic;">Vanity Fair</span>, thought was blood. Based on the discrepancy between Ms. Knox’s description of the bathroom and its seemingly bloody appearance, some observers <a href="http://s1.zetaboards.com/Liestoppers_meeting/topic/2609363/2/">lost trust</a> in Ms. Knox.***<br /> <br /><a href="http://www.injusticeinperugiaforum.org/what-the-bathroom-really-looked-like-to-amanda-t905.html">The actual appearance</a> of the bathroom was unremarkable, except for a small number of droplets of blood and a partial footprint that may have been made in bloody water.<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/Amanda_Knox_-_Bathroom_Fallacy_-_What_Amanda_Saw_WMV_V9_0001.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 549px; height: 382px;" src="http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/Amanda_Knox_-_Bathroom_Fallacy_-_What_Amanda_Saw_WMV_V9_0001.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />However the pink color may have been from using the Kastle-Meyer reagent over a large surface area and allowing air to oxidize the phenolphthalin. However, the color may have instead been the result of reagents used for latent fingerprint analysis. The pink photo at the top of this page was apparently not entered into evidence at the trial.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Confirmatory tests</span><br />Confirmatory tests are typically run after presumptive tests have given a positive result. Their purpose is to distinguish blood from substances that can give false positives for blood. Forensic scientists <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19328638">Dr. Kelly Virkler and Dr. Igor Lednev</a> identify five classes of confirmatory tests: microscope tests, crystal tests, spectroscopic methods, immunological tests, and chromatographic methods. Crystal tests are based on the formation of crystals of heme (or a pyridine-based derivative of heme), and they are not performed as much as in previous years. Immunological tests that are based upon antibodies (immunoglobulins) that bind to hemoglobin, lactate dehydrogenase (more specifically, the distribution of the isozymes of lactate dehydrogenase), glycophorin A, or other biomolecules are more recent innovations. There are many methods which employ antibodies, such as the early double diffusion (Ouchterlony) experiments and more recent immunochemical techniques, such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs).<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">False Positives and the language of forensic reports</span><br />Presumptive tests will often give false positives in presence of metal ions or plant material containing peroxidases. Drano and bleach are two of several household products that can yield a false positive with luminol, as noted by <a href="http://www.redwop.com/download/hemaglow.pdf">Lt. Robin Bratton</a>. Some of the putative bloodstains in the Lindy Chamberlain case (in which she was wrongfully convicted of murdering her infant) may have been the result of copper dust from the atmosphere, discussed by <a href="http://nzic.org.nz/ChemProcesses/biotech/12A.pdf">Dr. R. V. Winchester</a>. The Chamberlains lived in Mt Isa, which is home to copper mines.<br /><br />The case of <a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/12/26/881887/sbi-in-minority-on-test-results.html">Greg Taylor</a> in North Carolina illustrates how one’s fate can turn on the choice of which information is revealed and the choice of words the forensic scientists use to convey the results. Joseph Neff and Mandy Locke wrote, “In Taylor's case, an alleged blood stain was the only physical evidence tying him to the murder. The presumptive test was positive; the confirmatory test was negative. The lab report made no mention of the negative confirmatory test…The FBI's written policy directed the analyst first to report the positive presumptive test results. If the confirmatory test is negative, the analyst would write, ‘Further testing could not confirm the presence of human blood.’” Some problems that can arise when a confirmatory test is negative are discussed in Appendix A.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The luminol-positive areas in the murder of Meredith Kercher</span><br />There were two luminol-positive areas in Filomena’s room, and both contained mixtures of DNA (the DNA mixtures will be treated in a separate blog article). There were three <a href="http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/footprints-01.html">footprints</a> in the hallway, and all tested negative for DNA. There was also a shoe print that contained both Meredith’s and Amanda’s DNA.<br /><br />It emerged during the trial that the luminol-positive areas that contained DNA were subjected to a second presumptive blood test, tetramethylbenzidine (TMB). Dr. Sarah Gino noted in her testimony that TMB is negative about 50% of the time when luminol-positive areas are tested (Massei Motivations Report, p. 258, English Translation). Although luminol is more sensitive than TMB, TMB can detect blood that has been diluted up to 10,000-fold.<br /><br />It is sometimes argued that negative TMB results in the Kercher case can be ascribed to this difference in sensitivity. There are several reasons to reject this explanation. First, if it were the only explanation for TMB giving a negative result, no forensic personnel would ever use TMB after using luminol: A negative result would not rule out the presence of blood, yet a positive result would still require a confirmatory test afterwards. Second, the window of dilution factors for which one would expect a positive luminol reaction but a negative TMB reaction is relatively small. Third, if one did have a sample which fell into this range, the luminol response would be weak, whereas Colonel Garofano remarked upon the sheer luminosity* of the footprints in the book Darkness Descending. A study by <a href="http://www.abacusdiagnostics.com/Detecting_Burnt_Bloodstain_Samples_with_Light_Emitting_Blood_Enhancement_Reagents.pdf">Bilous and coworkers</a> showed that the maximum intensity of light emitted fell with decreasing concentration of blood (see Table 1).<br /><br />With respect to the luminol-positive/TMB-negative/DNA-negative areas, I asked the authors of a <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19328638">recent study</a> on the forensics of body fluid identification for their interpretation. <a href="http://www.albany.edu/news/11562.php">Drs. Virkler and Lednev</a> wrote, “So, there was either no blood and the luminol was wrong, or there was blood and the TMB had interference and the luminol damaged the DNA. We think it is more likely that there was no blood, and that the luminol was reacting with something else, possibly plant matter from the bottom of the shoes causing the footprints (the intensity of the luminol reaction might give some more insight). The prosecution should have used much more convincing evidence to prove the presence of blood.”<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Were the luminol-positive areas related to the crime?</span><br />The footprints in the hallway are all right feet images** and <a href="http://knoxarchive.wordpress.com/2009/11/27/manuela-comodi-asks-for-common-sense/">do not form a trail</a>. No reference footprints were taken from anyone except Amanda, Raffaele, and Rudi, nor can the prints be dated. Yet Judge Massei regards the prints as being made in blood. He said (p. 284 in the English translation of the Massei Motivations Report), “In this regard, one cannot simply disregard the fact that the bloodstains were undeniably abundant in Meredith’s room, from which easily, or indeed inevitably, they must have been exported to other parts of the house by anyone who, coming out of Meredith’s room, went into these other parts.” In some respects this line of reasoning is similar to Dr. Stefanoni’s argument in front of Judge Micheli during the pretrial, as reported in Candace Dempsey’s blog, <a href="http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2011/04/08/amanda-knox-bloody-footprints-tested-negative-for-blood/">Let's Talk About True Crime</a>. This argument is extremely poor. It suggests that the footprints should form a continuous trail of right and left footprints away from Meredith’s room, contrary to fact. It treats luminol as if it were a confirmatory test for blood, and it ignores the negative TMB testing that was done on at least some of the luminol-positive areas.<br /><br />Finally, two other facts lead one to question whether the luminol-positive spots are related to the crime. One is that the luminol data were collected on December 18, not in early November right after the crime but rather after the police had tossed the crime scene. This means that law enforcement personnel may have tracked luminol-positive material into Filomena’s room, for example. Two is that the police found many luminol-positive areas in Sollecito’s flat. There is no reason to associate any of these regions with the murder, and Sarah Gino’s testimony suggests that luminol-positive areas are not uncommon in forensic investigations.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The relationship between DNA testing and confirmatory blood testing</span><br />Although DNA typing is a powerful tool in forensics, it is not a test for blood. The <a href="http://www.nfstc.org/pdi/Subject02/pdi_s02_m02_01_a.htm">National Forensic Science Technology Center</a> said, “For example, while examining the clothing of a suspect, a forensic biologist might visually locate a brown stain that presumptively tested positive for blood and was then DNA typed. The DNA type is found to match the victim. Knowing that the loci tested are higher primate specific, what conclusions can be drawn? The only unqualified conclusion that can be offered is that the stain contains DNA that matches the victim. It has not been proven to be blood.” In response to a question of mine, Dr. Virkler and Dr. Lednev concurred: “It is correct to assume that DNA profiling is not a confirmatory test for blood because it can be found in so many other things. Just confirming the presence of the victim or suspect's DNA has absolutely no bearing on what type of tissue or fluid it is. There could have been skin cells scattered in a pile of ketchup that would match a person's DNA, but that doesn't make it blood.”<br /><br />In <a href="http://truthinjustice.org/sbi.audit.report.pdf">"An Independent of the SBI forensic laboratory"</a> in North Carolina, Chris Swecker and Michael Wolf stated, “It should be noted that the confirmatory ‘Takayama’ blood test that was at issue in the Taylor Innocence Commission proceedings was discontinued in 2003 and replaced with DNA and rapid Stain identification tests.” The Rapid Stain kit manufactured by <a href="http://www.ifi-test.com/pdf/Blood_Tech_Insert.pdf">Independent Forensics</a> of Hillside, IL “uses two mouse monoclonal antibodies specific for human glycophorin A.” Glycophorin A is a protein found on the membranes of red blood cells.<br /><br />The lack of DNA in a sample suggests that a substance is not blood, but that relationship is not absolute. The sample might contain an inhibitor of the polymerase chain reaction needed to amplify DNA in present-day DNA forensics or the presumptive test itself may have an effect on the DNA profiling. The exact formulation of luminol affects how much DNA is recovered.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Update 2, 6 PM 7/8/11</span><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Conclusions</span><br />The luminol-positive areas can be subdivided into those that did and those that did not have DNA. The amorphous regions in Filomena’s room fall into the former category, and the footprints in the hallway fall into the latter category. However, none was subjected to a confirmatory test for blood, and none should be concluded to be blood. The presence of DNA in some of the areas does not constitute a confirmatory test; additionally, the areas with DNA were negative in the TMB tests. The other luminol-positive areas were not confirmed to be blood. Ms. Comodi asked for the jury to decide whether or not the areas were blood. The jury should not have concluded that any luminol-positive area was blood, and that is one reason that the notion that these areas were <span style="font-style:italic;">mixed</span> blood is a fallacy. We will explore this erroneous notion in a subsequent entry.<br /> <br />***A previous version of this sentence was incomplete. It read, "Based on the discrepancy between Ms. Knox’s description of the bathroom and its seemingly bloody appearance." I completed the sentence and added a link to a discussion board.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Update 1 7/7/11, 2 PM EDT<br /></span>*On page 377 in the book Darkness Descending, Colonel Garofano discussed the luminol-positive prints in Amanda's room and the prints attributed to her in the hallway: "FIrst of all, from their sheer luminosity they are blood. The DNA test showed Meredith's blood in all cases except for two places in which we have a mixed Amanda and Meredith sample." Colonel Garofano's statement implies that the luminol-positive areas all had Meredith's DNA, which is false. They also seem to equate a hypothetically presence of DNA as meaning that blood is also present, and this is also false, as discussed above. Thanks to Rose Montague for asking for the exact quote.<br />**A reader suggested a different wording, such as "each footprint in the hallway is a right-foot image," would be clearer. I am grateful for this suggestion.<br /><br />Update 3 6 PM 7/12/11<br />I added two links on Drs. Virkler and Lednev.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Appendix A, Forensic bias and confirmatory blood tests</span><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">The Raleigh News and Observer</span> reported, “Jed Taub, a 30-year veteran of the SBI, said, ’We didn't report the negative result of a confirmatory test because, really, it's misleading,’ said Taub, who now works as a forensic investigator for the Pitt County Sheriff's Office. ‘We couldn't be sure it wasn't blood, so those tests really didn't matter.’’ Reporters <a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/08/20/636932/ex-sbi-analyst-defends-withholding.html#ixzz1LFW05knz">Mandy Locke and Joseph Neff</a> continued, “Taub said that the only times he reported the absence of blood was when he got a negative result on that first, presumptive test. Any negative results after that were irrelevant, he said.”<br /><br />In another article in the series on North Carolina’s <a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/08/19/635629/sbi-labs-prosecutorial-slant-still.html#ixzz1LFq4Z1h4">SBI forensic laboratory</a> Neff and Locke reported, “Perhaps the biggest challenge facing new SBI Director Greg McLeod is changing the culture of the SBI and the laboratory. Analysts have worked to support the theories of prosecutors, instead of rendering detached scientific analysis. Training manuals, some which have been withdrawn, have coached analysts to support prosecutors and distrust defense attorneys. This bias extended down to the very way analysts reported test results. ‘They were writing reports to law enforcement,’ said Chris Swecker, the former FBI supervisor who audited the blood cases. ‘They were trying not to write any negative test results.’”<br /><br />These stories suggest that some aspects of forensic bias can be traced to the close relationship between law enforcement and forensic science laboratories. With respect to the forensics there is nothing that happened in Perugia that could not happen in the United States.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Appendix B, Some other presumptive and confirmatory tests</span><br /><br />Leucomalachite green: Hemoglobin catalyzes the oxidation of the reduced form of leucomalachite green to the oxidized form, much as in the Kastle-Meyer test.<br /><br />Leucocrystal violet: This test is very similar to the leucomalachite green test.<br /><br />Takayama crystal tests: The sensitivity is about 0.001 mL of blood or 0.1 mg of haemoglobin. The crystals are pink in color.Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-33983635061601661402011-06-29T17:17:00.007-04:002011-06-29T19:00:21.880-04:00The Independent DNA Experts Weigh InPart 29 in the Knox/Sollecito case<br /><br />Judge Hellmann, who is presiding over the appeal, appointed Conti and Carla Vecchiotti as independent experts to review the bra clasp and knife DNA evidence. The translation of their conclusions was provided by komponisto, who also authored <a href="http://lesswrong.com/lw/1j7/the_amanda_knox_test_how_an_hour_on_the_internet/">“The Amanda Knox Test.”</a> Their report will be discussed in court next month. The formatting (bold or italics) is in the original.<br /><br /><br />CONCLUSIONS<br /><br />Based on the considerations explained above, we are able to respond as follows to the inquiries posed at the assignment hearing:<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">"Having examined the record and conducted such technical investigations as shall be necessary, the Expert Panel shall ascertain:<br /><br />1. whether it is possible, by means of a new technical analysis, to identify the DNA present on items 165b (bra clasp) and 36 (knife), and to determine the reliability of any such identification"</span><br /><br />- The tests that we conducted to determine the <span style="font-weight:bold;">presence of blood</span> on item 36 (knife) and item 165B (bra clasps) yielded a <span style="font-weight:bold;">negative result</span>.<br /><br />- The cytomorphological tests on the items <span style="font-weight:bold;">did not reveal the presence of cellular material.</span> Some samples of item 36 (knife), in particular sample "H", present granules with a circular/hexagonal characteristic morphology with a cental radial structure. A more detailed microscopic study, together with the consultation of data in the literature, allowed us to ascertain that the structures in question are attributable to <span style="font-weight:bold;">granules of starch</span>, thus matter of a vegetable nature.<br /><br />- The quantification of the extracts obtained from the samples obtained from item 36 (knife) and item 165B (bra clasps), conducted via Real Time PCR, <span style="font-weight:bold;">did not reveal the presence of DNA</span>.<br /><br />- In view of the absence of DNA in the extracts that we obtained, with the agreement of the consultants for the parties, we did not proceed to the subsequent amplification step.<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">2. "if it is not possible to carry out a new technical analysis, shall evaluate, on the basis of the record, the degree of reliability of the genetic analysis performed by the Scientific Police on the aforementioned items, including with respect to possible contamination."</span><br /><br />Having examined the record and the relevant documents, we are able to report the following conclusions regarding the laboratory analyses performed on Item 36 (knife) and Item 165B (bra clasps):<br /><br />ITEM 36 (KNIFE)<br /><br />Relative to the genetic analysis performed on <span style="font-weight:bold;">trace A</span> (handle of the knife), <span style="font-weight:bold;">we agree with the conclusion reached by the Technical Consultant regarding the attribution of the genetic profile obtained from these samples to Amanda Marie Knox.</span><br /><br />Relative to <span style="font-weight:bold;">trace B</span> (blade of the knife) we find that the <span style="font-weight:bold;">technical analyses performed are not reliable</span> for the following reasons:<br /><br />1. <span style="font-weight:bold;">There does not exist evidence which scientifically confirms that trace B (blade of knife) is the product of blood.</span><br /><br />2. <span style="font-weight:bold;">The electrophoretic profiles exhibited reveal that the sample indicated by the letter B (blade of knife) was a Low Copy Number (LCN) sample, and, as such, all of the precautions indicated by the international scientific community should have been applied.</span><br /><br />3. Taking into account that none of the recommendations of the international scientific community relative to the treatment of Low Copy Number (LCN) samples were followed, <span style="font-weight:bold;">we do not accept the conclusions regarding the certain attribution of the profile found on trace B (blade of knife) to the victim Meredith Susanna Cara Kercher, since the genetic profile, as obtained, appears unreliable insofar as it is not supported by scientifically validated analysis;</span><br /><br />4.<span style="font-weight:bold;"> International protocols of inspection, collection, and sampling were not followed;</span><br /><br />5. <span style="font-weight:bold;">It cannot be ruled out that the result obtained from sample B (blade of knife) derives from contamination in some phase of the collection and/or handling and/or analyses performed.</span><br /><br /><br />ITEM 165B (BRA CLASPS)<br /><br />Relative to Item 165B (bra clasps), we find that the technical analysis is not reliable for the following reasons:<br /><br />1. <span style="font-weight:bold;">There does not exist evidence which scientifically confirms the presence of supposed flaking cells on the item;</span><br /><br />2. <span style="font-weight:bold;">There was an erroneous interpretation of the electrophoretic profile of the autosomic STRs;</span><br /><br />3. <span style="font-weight:bold;">There was an erroneous interpretation of the electrophoretic profile relative to the Y chromosome;<br /></span><br />4. <span style="font-weight:bold;">The international protocols for inspection, collection, and sampling of the item were not followed;<br /></span><br />5. <span style="font-weight:bold;">It cannot be ruled out that the results obtained derive from environmental contamination and/or contamination in some phase of the collection and/or handling of the item.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">THE EXPERTS</span><br /><br />Prof. Carla Vecchiotti<br /><br />Prof. Stefano ContiChris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-91758421953891685972011-05-16T21:37:00.006-04:002011-06-13T09:45:35.208-04:00The Independent DNA Experts and the Electronic Data Files<span style="font-weight:bold;">Part 28 in the Knox/Sollecito case</span><br /><br />Update, 13 June 2011<br /><br />In the story “Knox appeal: DNA experts to request more time” from the <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iP1aag3ndR_PAiK04QHGTdKSgYFQ?docId=CNG.b491a9a79ea954df372df79ff5f964e2.341">AFP on 20 May 2011</a>, Knox lawyer Carlo Dalla Vedova said “The experts asked the forensic police to hand over information essential to their report on the DNA. They still haven't received it and will therefore request a 40 days extension.” He added, “It's not the first time we've asked for the police to hand over this information,” He also said, “But they need the raw data they have asked for from the police to do so. We first asked for it in 2009 and it's still not been handed over.” This ends the debate about whether or not the forensic files were ever released to the defense during the trial of the first instance.<br />____________________<br /><br />Judge Hellmann appointed two independent experts to review the DNA forensic evidence in Amanda Knox’s and Raffaele Sollecito’s appeal. Recently, the experts asked for more time, and reports suggested that they did not yet have access to documents the felt were necessary to carry out this task. <br /><br />According to Candace Dempsey, forensic scientist under whose supervision the tests were carried out, Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni, <a href="http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2011/05/09/stop-withholding-evidence-judge-tells-amanda-knox-prosecution/">turned aside this request</a>. She wrote to Judge Hellman, “In reference to the request of acquisition of CD RAW DATA, one is obligated to explain that the information in the form of this file in the sequencer is never an integral part of the technical report, as far as the object being tested by the forensic geneticist, namely the DNA profile, and that it is already reported in the electropherogram printout, connected to the technical report on which all of the useful date and an evaluation of the genetic profile are reported… Finally, the request asked for by the expert consultants relative to the acquisition of the CD RAW DATA appears incomplete in so much as the name of the ‘sample file’ requested was not specified…”<br /><br />To help me consider Dr. Stefanoni's refusal refusal, I have consulted with DNA forensics professionals Dan Krane and Jason Gilder of Forensic Bioinformatics, and I gratefully acknowledge their help. The continued<a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/07/to-those-who-believe-that-amanda-knox.html"> lack of file release</a> with respect to the DNA profiling of this case has been a recurring theme of this blog.<br /><br />Her arguments against releasing further information are essentially:<br />(1) All of the necessary data are already in the paper printouts of the electropherograms.<br />(2) The request for data files is insufficiently specific.<br /><br />Let us examine point (1) first. Dr. Stefanoni’s position appears to be the same as it was when Dr. Pascali <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/06/raffaele-sollecitos-appeal.html">was refused data</a>, as noted in Raffaele’s appeal. Yet some of the electropherograms only provide the number of repeats, not the peak height for each peak. Peak heights are essential to evaluate peak height imbalance within a locus, which bears on the question of whether or not a sample is in the low-template range, and whether two peaks within a locus belong to the same or to two different individuals. Peak heights can also be used to quantify the severity of degradation when one compares DNA fragments of different lengths. Peak height ratios also help one to decide whether or not a small peak is a type of artifact known as a stutter. A careful examination of these small peaks is especially important in helping to judge what other DNA is present on the bra clasp besides Meredith’s and presumably Raffaele’s.<br /><br />In addition, having the electronic data files allows one to calculate a run-specific limit of detection (Gilder et al., J. Forensic Science, January 2007, 52 (1), 97). This process sets a lower limit on the size of which peaks to accept, based on the amount of noise.<br /><br />It can also be helpful in detecting a type of artifact known as a pull-up. There are four types of dyes used in DNA profiling, each with a different wavelength (color) of detection. Each dye is ordinarily detected in its own channel. Sometimes a large peak gives a small spurious signal because of bleeding from one channel into another (Butler, Forensic DNA Typing (2005), pp. 336-337; 384). <a href="http://www.bioforensics.com/conference08/Complications/index.html">According to</a> Christine Funk and Dr. Simon Ford, “Pull-up can usually be identified through careful analysis of the position of peaks across the color spectrum, but there is a danger that pull-up will go unrecognized, particularly when the result it produces is consistent with what the analyst expected or wanted to find.”<br /><br />Dan Krane was asked to give his opinion about the release of such files in a separate legal matter. He wrote, “I believe that a defense expert cannot competently evaluate the results of an STR DNA test without having access to the test’s underlying electronic data. In my experience, review of electronic data has often led directly to the discovery of important problems or limitations in the STR testing, or to alternative theories of the evidence, that would not have been apparent based on a review of laboratory reports or other laboratory records… In my opinion, review of the electronic data is as important as review of the laboratory’s written notes…There is <span style="font-weight:bold;">no legitimate reason</span> for a laboratory to refuse a defendant’s request to examine the electronic data.” (bolding mine) Finally, this blog has previously noted that the <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/10/american-bar-association-and-dna.html">ABA standards</a> explicitly call for release of the electronic data files.<br /><br />Point (2) is equally difficult to comprehend. Clearly Dr. Stefanoni understands that the electronic data files are being requested, yet apparently wants specific file names. It is difficult to see how the independent scientists would know the file naming convention used in Dr. Stefanoni’s lab. Who does Dr. Stefanoni think can provide the specific file names?<br /><br />Forensic Bioinformatics has a 10-point standard <a href="http://www.bioforensics.com/downloads/discovery.html">discovery motion</a>, and point 6 covers files. The material should include:<br />(6.1) All collection files (such as injection lists and log files for an ABI 310 analysis).<br />(6.2) All GeneScan® files, including sample files and project files.<br />(6.3) All Genotyper® files, including templates/macros (see Request 5).<br />(6.4) All GeneMapper® files, including sample files (.fsa files) and project files (.ser files). <br />(6.5) If the data you are providing includes files from another case that are not pertinent to the instant case (e.g., sample files from another case included in the same run folder), then please identify those non-pertinent samples by name and laboratory code.<br /><br />Clearly it is the job of the laboratory that performed the test to provide the file names.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Concluding remarks</span><br />The failure of Dr. Stefanoni’s laboratory to provide the data to the independent forensic scientists is a continuation of her refusal to provide them to the defense. There is absolutely no legitimate reason for her to do so. As Dan Krane noted, “It is a fundamental tenet of science that two reasonable experts should be able to independently arrive at the same conclusions after reviewing the same experimental data.”Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com24tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-40474787145496352672011-03-17T21:29:00.010-04:002012-07-07T17:12:29.356-04:00An analysis of the bra clasp DNAPart 27 in the Knox/Sollecito case<br /><br /><i>Update (7 July 2012)</i><br /><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Some time ago I reviewed some passages in the English translation of the Massei report that concern the bra clasp DNA and examined better electropherograms. &nbsp;I would like to discuss these without revealing the reference profiles of any of the individuals.&nbsp; The interested reader should also consult the translation of the <a href="http://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">Conti-Vecchiotti report</a> and&nbsp;<a href="https://forensicdnaconsulting.wordpress.com/2011/09/26/understanding-the-independent-dna-experts%E2%80%99-report-in-the-amanda-knox-case-part-2/" target="_blank">this blog</a>.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Times;">Stutter peaks<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">On page 206 Stefanoni used the word “noise” in a different manner from the way a spectroscopist would use it. From page 207, “Thus, where there is an allele which has a certain height and such that the peak just before it has a much smaller height, at most 15% of the first one, then the previous peak should be considered noise, just a by-product of the analysis.” One infers that Stefanoni used the word noise to refer to stutter peaks and possibly to refer to other artifacts such as blobs. Tagliabracci also used the word noise to mean stutter on p. 241.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">If an allele is found at 17 repeats, one expects to see a peak at 16 repeats that is less than 15% the intensity of the peak at 15 but rarely does one see a stutter peak at 18 repeats.&nbsp; The basis of stutter is that the primer and the template DNA strands do not always anneal perfectly in the DNA replication process. It is far more likely that the bulge of one extra repeat unit will occur on the template strand than on the primer strand, and that is why the stutter peak almost always has one repeat unit less than the true allele.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">A problem for a forensic DNA scientist is that when a mixture consists of one strong and one weak profile, discriminating between the weak profile and the stutter peaks is very challenging. &nbsp;John Butler (p. 125) wrote, “Mixture interpretation requires a good understanding of the behavior of stutter products in single source samples.” <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Times;">Threshold values<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">On page 207 one reads, “The height which is considered reliable for a peak to be qualified as an allele is equal to 50 RFU, the symbol RFU representing the unit of measure employed for these measurements.” This is a remarkable statement in one respect, inasmuch as if Stefanoni actually adhered to it, about 22 of about 29 peaks attributed to Meredith on the knife profile would fail to be scored. In other words, she did not respect her own minimum threshold value in at least one other experiment.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Times;">Interpretations<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">On pages 208-209, one encounters some strange statements. “She was asked if she had considered that peak, number 13 [This peak is in locus D5S818 and its height is 108 RFU], as an allele or as noise. Dr Stefanoni declared that she had not considered that peak as an allele or as noise… it can't be an allele because it is too low with respect to the main peaks.” This argument does not make sense; either a peak is an artifact or it is real. It is not in the correct position to be stutter, and there is no reason why a true allele can’t be smaller than Meredith’s profile. Moreover Tagliabracci questioned Stefanoni’s interpretation of this allele (pp. 241-242), noting that in locus vWA that she had taken a peak of only 65 RFU as an allele. Stefanoni argued that each peak should be judged on a case-by-case basis (p. 209), including information such as the main peak heights. Yet the main peaks in vWA are 84% as high as the main peaks in D5S818 on average, whereas 65 RFU is only 60% of 108 RFU. In other words what objective criterion Dr. Stefanoni used to reject a peak of 108 RFU and keep a peak of 65 RFU is obscure or nonexistent. Finally, there are other peaks in vWA at 17 and 18 repeats that are not labeled yet the larger of the two is about 50 RFU. It is difficult to see why this peak was not considered an allele.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Stefanoni</span><span style="font-family: Times;"> was asked about an alternate interpretation, one in which a minor contributor would have the alleles 12 and 13. “In response to this question-observation, Dr Stefanoni explained that in this case, it would not be possible to explain the Y chromosome, and thus reaffirmed the correctness of the interpretation she had given.” It sounds as if Stefanoni used her attribution of the Y-chromosome profile to Raffaele to then interpret the autosomal DNA as having his profile.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">Locus D21S11 is problematic (pp. 241-242). Stefanoni counted as stutter a peak that is 15.6% the height of the next peak. That is higher than the 15% cutoff, which is higher than stutter with which I am familiar. But she counted as real a peak that is 17.2% of the next peak, which is not that much of a difference. This peak could constitute half of Raffaele’s profile in this locus, but the other half would fall underneath one of Meredith’s two peaks, which are roughly sixfold higher. Although it is possible that Raffaele’s other allele is present and contributes additional intensity to the second of the two large peaks belonging to Meredith, I don’t see any reason to assume that it must.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;">There are peaks on the bra clasp electropherogram that are not part of Raffaele’s profile and are not stutter. In reviewing the bra clasp DNA, I am more concerned than I was before that Stefanoni applied a suspect-centered approach, which would be contrary to good forensic practice.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times;"><br /></span></div><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Introduction</span><br />A <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/01/meredith-kerchers-bra-clasp.html">previous post</a> has examined the DNA on the bra clasp, which has a strong profile from the victim, Meredith Kercher. In this post we will examine the bra clasp DNA on the basis of the available information with respect to whether or not Raffaele’s DNA is present. We will also look into the uncertainties surrounding whether or not the DNA of a third party’s DNA is present. However, a complete analysis would require electronic data files, not electropherogram images, and the defense never received these or other files. All references to the Massei Motivations report are given with respect to the English translation available at perugiamurderfile.org. Dr. Adriano Tagliabracci was an expert witness for Raffaele Sollecito’s defense, and his interpretation of the bra clasp DNA profile clashed with Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni’s, the chief prosecution witness with respect to DNA forensics. The bra clasp also figured prominently in an open letter coauthored by two DNA forensic experts and cosigned by seven others.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Executive Summary</span><br />Y-chromosomal DNA corresponding to Raffaele’s haplotype was found on the clasp as well as many alleles corresponding to his autosomal DNA. Dr. Tagliabracci’s critique of Dr. Stefanoni’s analysis, that it was suspect-centered, is probably valid but is tangential to the more important questions surrounding the collection of the clasp. The reanalysis of the clasp in the appeal will likely conclude that a partial profile corresponding to Raffaele’s autosomal DNA (but possibly not a full profile) is present. However, there are one or more other contributors as well, apart from Meredith, and the more salient question is how this DNA was deposited on the clasp. There is no reason to suppose that the third person’s DNA necessarily arrived via a different mechanism from Raffaele’s: Secondary transfer, contamination at the crime scene, and evidence-tampering are all more likely than Raffaele’s depositing DNA on this dubious piece of evidence during the murder, but not depositing DNA on the bra itself or leaving any other trace in Meredith’s bedroom.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Analyzing Mixtures of DNA</span><br />It is worth reiterating that analyses of DNA mixtures are somewhat subjective. With respect to the John Puckett case, <a href="http://www.sanfranmag.com/story/dna%E2%80%99s-identity-crisis">Chris Smith</a> reported: “Mixed samples are another flashpoint in the DNA wars. It can be exceedingly difficult to separate one person’s DNA from another’s, especially in a degraded sample like this, and there is no universally accepted way to interpret the resulting profile. As the eminent British researcher Peter Gill told a conference of his fellow forensic scientists in 2005, ‘If you show 10 colleagues a mixture, you will probably end up with 10 different answers.’ Even Cheng’s supervisor, a combative man named Matt Gabriel, reluctantly admits on the stand that there is no agreed-on protocol for handling mixed samples.” With respect to the Puckett case <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/1003.bobelian.html">Michael Bobelaian</a> quoted Professor Dan Krane: “’There is a public perception that DNA profiles are black and white,’ he told me. ‘The reality is that easily in half of all cases—namely, those where the samples are mixed or degraded—there is the potential for subjectivity.’”<br /><br />An <a href="http://www.bioforensics.com/sequential_unmasking/">article</a> in the Journal of Forensic Sciences provides good discussion of how to minimize observer effects in DNA forensics. Among the authors are co-signers of the Johnson-Hampikian open letter and one person who has written extensively on the problem of investigator bias. Note that the proposal indicates that the investigator should not have access to the reference samples until quite late into the analysis process. In other words, one wrong way to analyze an evidence sample would be to lay reference sample electropherograms on top of it and look for matches. Overlaying the reference sample onto the evidence electropherogram after the analysis is complete simply to present the data is fine.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Stutter peaks</span><br />Individuals vary in the number of short terminal repeats of DNA at various locations in their chromosomes, and this is the basis of DNA profiling. Larger fragments of DNA emerge later from the capillary tube and give rise to peaks in an electropherogram. Each peak corresponds with one allele. Stutter peaks are a type of artifact in the electropherogram, and they most often show up at a position on the time-axis (which is proportional to the size of the DNA fragment) that is one repeat unit shorter than the true allele. They are usually in the vicinity of 5% of the height of the true peak with which they are related. For the purposes of this analysis, we will assume that any peak that is one repeat unit shorter than an allele in Meredith’s profile is likely to be a stutter peak.<br /><br />From the Massei Report, about page 243: "Regarding locus D7S820, he [Dr. Tagliabracci] revealed that Forensics had interpreted it, recognizing the presence of two alleles, 8 and 11; they had not taken into consideration a peak, low, but still higher than 50 RFU, corresponding to allele 10." To whom does it belong? In locus D16S539, Dr. Tagliabracci believes that there is a peak at the 13 locus. This allele is also not part of Meredith’s or Raffaele’s profile, but it is quite possible that both are stutter peaks.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Other DNA on the clasp</span><br />However, there are other small peaks besides the one at 10 in the D7S820 locus, and because of their positions along the time-axis, it is difficult to believe that they are stutters. In locus D19S433 there are alleles at 10 and 14 repeats that are not part of Meredith’s or Raffaele’s profile. In locus vWA there appear to be peaks at 9, 11, and 18, that are not part of these individual’s DNA profiles. In other words, there is probably DNA on the clasp that belongs to someone other than Meredith Kercher or Raffaele Sollecito. Although it is difficult to say how many individuals contributed, there would seem to be at least two. The critical question is how it came to be there, taken up below. Some have tried to claim that Amanda was a third contributor to the bra clasp DNA. However, there can be no doubt that Amanda's complete profile is not on the bra clasp.<br /><br />The presence of these small peaks raises another question. Many of these small peaks were not marked on the electropherogram of the clasp, suggesting the possibility that Dr. Stefanoni’s lab did not consider them to be real peaks. Some of them appear to be in the range of 100 RFUs. Although they are small relative to typical peaks, they are as large or larger than all of the peaks in Meredith’s profile from the kitchen knife. This forces one to ask whether a consistent peak threshold were used for all samples, and if not, one has to question whether <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/01/amanda-knox-and-raffaele-sollecito-and.html">peak thresholds</a> were changed <span style="font-style: italic;">ex post facto</span>, something that seems contrary to basic principles.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Raffaele’s putative DNA on the bra clasp</span><br />Raffaele and Meredith shared eleven alleles out of about thirty. Because Meredith’s profile is roughly eightfold more intense than Raffaele’s putative profile, it is very challenging at the very least to know whether Meredith’s DNA alone or Meredith’s plus Raffaele’s DNA contributed to the strong (&gt;1000 RFU) peaks in the profile. For one thing, peaks heights can decrease from left to right across an elecropherogram due to degradation, which attenuates peak heights corresponding to large DNA fragments more than smaller loci. For another, small peaks vary in intensity more than large ones due to noise and stochastic effects. An additional complication is that Raffaele’s profile has a few peaks that would show up at the same position as stutter peaks from Meredith’s profile would.<br /><br />Let us now turn to the alleles in which Raffaele’s reference profile is distinct from Meredith’s profile. “Professor Tagliabracci then maintained that this suspect-centric method was detectible in Dr. Stefanoni’s report and presentation because, he affirmed, it was a case of forcing the profile obtained … eliminating or leaving out alleles [257] solely for the purpose of making that profile compatible with Raffaele Sollecito’s profile.” (Massei Report translation, p. 241)<br /><br />The presence of Raffaele’s DNA in YSTR testing strengthens the case that Raffaele’s autosomal DNA is present on the clasp, though in low quantity. One way to take some of Dr. Tagliabracci’s objections into account is to acknowledge that Raffaele’s DNA is present in the low template number range, as discussed in the appendix below. <br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Some problems in the collection techniques</span><br />As noted above the key question is how did Raffaele’s DNA and the DNA of one or more other individuals become deposited onto the clasp. Contamination can happen when an item of evidence is collected at the scene of a crime, as well as when it is tested in the laboratory. In this <a href="http://www.injusticeinperugia.com/contamination.html">series of photographs</a> the same crease in a glove of a forensics worker is seen, indicating that this glove was not changed. On page 13 of the book “Angel Face” Barbie Nadeau reported on Dr. Stefanoni’s cross-examination by Raffaele’s lawyer Giulia Bongiorno. Ms. Bongiorno noted that Dr. Stefanoni’s bracelet was seen in the same position above her glove, again pointing to gloves not being changed.<br /><br />Dr. Stefanoni’s view was that contamination was much less likely with dry traces than with liquids (Massei Report translation, pp. 201-202; 204-205). “Regarding the possibility of transferring exfoliated cells that may be found on a hand or a glove, Dr Stefanoni explained that in the abstract, anything could be transferred, but it remained to be seen in practice. So, with specific reference to exfoliated cells, she stressed that it would be necessary to press down with force or scratch over a surface where these would have to be present (for example, the back of a person)… With reference to the single-use gloves, Dr. Stefanoni specified that they were changed, in the course of the search, every time an object was touched that was particularly soaked with blood, and when it was obvious that the gloves would be soiled; ‘otherwise, if it is just an ordinary object…I can move it, but this does not lead to my DNA remaining, let’s say, attached. It depends on the object.’” (Massei Report translation, pp. 202-203). One infers from her comments that in the absence of blood or obvious dirt or grime, gloves were not changed. Dr. Stefanoni’s views on how frequently gloves should be changed are not shared by any forensic scientists that I can identify. On page 38 of “Forensic DNA Typing,” the most authoritative textbook on the subject of DNA profiling, John Butler wrote, “Use clean latex gloves for collecting each item of evidence. Gloves should be changed between handling of different items of evidence.” Other guidelines make the same or similar recommendations.<br /><br />“She [Dr. Stefanoni] confirmed, therefore, that before having touched the clasp with those gloves, the gloves had not touched any other objects, since they had just been put on.” Yet some of the gloves were <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLE4s3jXTVU">dirty</a>, including one used to handle the bra clasp. The clasp was <a href="http://vimeo.com/7197797">handled</a> by at least two people wearing gloves when it should have been handled by one person using a disposable pair of tweezers. The bra clasp was also recovered more than a meter from where it was originally observed and noticeably dusty. In summary the late-collection and subsequent handling of the clasp substantially weaken its evidentiary value, as noted in the <a href="http://www.friendsofamanda.org/articles.html">Johnson-Hampikian</a> open letter of 19 November 2009.<br /><br />Dr. Stefanoni’s view that dehydrated traces are very hard to contaminate is also open to question. In the case of Gregory Turner <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/06/dna-contamination-and-dna-cold-hits.html%3Cbr%20/%3E">previously discussed</a> on this blog, a forensic worker contaminated fingernail clippings with both her DNA and Mr. Turner’s DNA from a ring, and there is no reason to believe that liquids were involved. Overall, the techniques in Dr. Stefanoni’s laboratory were not as stringent as they might have been, and this raises the chances of contamination, all other things being equal.<br /><br />The presence of DNA from one or more persons who are not suspects on the clasp is one of the most serious black marks against the bra clasp as evidence of Mr. Sollecito’s involvement in this crime. It is difficult to see how one or more unknown individuals deposited DNA by primary transfer; therefore, secondary transfer and contamination need to be considered carefully as mechanisms by which both Raffaele’s DNA and the DNA of one or more unknown individuals arrived on the clasp. <br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Appendix</span><br />One way to interpret Dr. Tagliabracci’s remarks is that he criticized Dr. Stefanoni for focusing on peaks in the clasp profile that happened to be in Raffaele's reference profile and ignoring peaks that did not. If Dr. Stefanoni did so because she had prior knowledge of Raffaele’s profile, then such analysis is open to question, as indicated above. Dr. Tagliabracci implied that this was a problem. “He pointed out that that there is a significant subjective element in reading the electropherograms. He focused in particular on locus D5S818, in which two principal alleles are present; together with a third peak with a height of 108 RFU; as this is higher than 50 RFU, it should have been considered an allele. Forensics [la Polizia Scientifica] did not, however, consider this to be the case; instead, they considered the 65 RFU peak to be an allele and observed that, in this way, a compatibility with Raffaele Sollecito’s profile resulted, which otherwise would not have been the case (page 59). With reference to this, Professor Tagliabracci repeated that there was a forced interpretation, which was typical of a suspect-centric attitude (page 60).” (Massei Report translation, p. 242) The quotation above only provides the peak height in RFU, not the number of repeats, which sets the location along the horizontal (time) axis. I do not know which peaks are meant.<br /><br />Dr. Tagliabracci’s approach seems to be more in line with the spirit of recommendations in the 2008 Journal of Forensic Sciences article cited above, although Dr. Stefanoni denied that she used a suspect-centered approach. The Massei report gives at least five instances where Dr. Tagliabracci differed with Dr. Stefanoni with respect to the interpretation of certain loci. Specifically with respect to D5S818, he challenged her interpretation when she took a smaller peak (65 RFU) in preference to a larger one (108 RFU) to be part of a profile. Because other peaks attributed to Raffaele are generally larger, in the range of 200 RFU, this objection needs to be answered.<br /><br />The Y-STR testing strengthens the case that Raffaele is indeed a contributor to the bra clasp DNA. Yet how can one explain the inequalities in peak heights in the peaks that correspond with his profile? It is possible for DNA belonging to Raffaele to have highly unequal peak heights for several reasons. One possibility is that this would happen when the non-Meredith DNA is in the low template number range. This could lead to large disparities in peak heights in the two alleles within any single locus because of stochastic effects. Dr. Tagliabracci was aware of this issue, as noted in the Massei Report translation, p. 240. Raffaele's putative DNA on the clasp is very weak, less than 200 pg according to his appeal. The exact amount of DNA depends on the details of the calculation. If the low-template number explanation is invoked to explain differences in peak heights, then the standard protocol for dealing with low template DNA is to run the sample at least twice. A retest has yet to be done but may become part of the appeals process.Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-75296146170351416192011-02-23T10:48:00.005-05:002011-02-23T11:04:23.022-05:00Comments on the accuracy of the Lifetime movie about Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito<span style="font-weight:bold;">Part 26 in the Knox/Sollecito case</span><br /><br />Lifetime premiered a movie on the murder of Meredith Kercher this week, called "Murder on Trial in Italy." I would like to hear everyone’s thoughts and possibly collect them into a summary. <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/US/faction-fiction-amanda-knox-lifetime-movie/story?id=12969134">ABC</a> and <a href="http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2011/02/22/amanda-knox-movie-flunks-truthiness-101/#respond">Candace Dempsey</a> have reported on this movie.Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-87224285278245583482011-02-19T15:30:00.006-05:002011-02-21T09:17:45.213-05:00February Updates<a href="http://www.friendsofericvolz.com/home/2011/2/17/researching-amanda-knox-start-here.html">Eric Volz’s blog</a> has added an interview with Professor Greg Hampikian, one of the two coauthors of the open letter covering the bra clasp and knife. Dr. Hampikian, of Boise State University, is the director of the Idaho Innocence Project. Lifetime is premiering a <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704657704576150431033958272.html">movie</a> this Monday, “Amanda Knox: Murder on Trial in Italy.” Edda Mellas and Curt Knox, Amanda’s parents, have been <a href="http://dailyuw.com/2011/2/18/amanda-knoxs-parents-ordered-stand-trial-libel/">indicted for libel</a>. Professor Alan Dershowitz mentioned their indictment in an interview in <a href="http://www.lastampa.it/_web/cmstp/tmplrubriche/finestrasullamerica/grubrica.asp?ID_blog=43&ID_articolo=1954&ID_sezione=58&sezione=">La Stampa</a>. A translation of what he said is “I love Italy, but in recent times you have made the freedom of expression very weak: the Italian government heavily influences the media and they charged the parents of Amanda Knox, guilty only of having made a public expressing opinions on the process of Perugia, however, tainted by legitimate concerns. On the ground of protection of freedom of the press is not giving Italy a great example.” Update: Another tranlsation can be found <a href="http://www3.lastampa.it/lastampa-in-english/articolo/lstp/389494/">here</a>.Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-6786247125195338062011-01-19T22:58:00.002-05:002011-01-19T23:36:10.486-05:00Why I believe that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are innocent<span style="font-weight:bold;">Part 25 in the Knox/Sollecito case</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The molehill of evidence</span><br />It is the evidence that is not there that is the prosecution’s weakest point, as former FBI agent <a href="http://www.injusticeinperugia.com/FBI2.html">Steve Moore</a> pointed out. Consider blood spatter, for instance: “t is inconceivable that the person stabbing Meredith was not contaminated by blood spatter. Guede was. Anybody holding Meredith (such as was alleged by the prosecution) would be within the spatter zone. Again; blood on clothes and skin.”<br /><br />There is no evidence that Amanda or Raffaele had any contact with Rudi Guede on the night of the murder. There is no evidence that they took any drugs other than cannabis. There is no DNA of Amanda’s in the murder room, and the only evidence of Raffaele’s is the highly contested <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/01/meredith-kerchers-bra-clasp.html">bra clasp</a>. Forensic Engineer <a href="http://www.injusticeinperugia.com/RonHendry------2.html">Ron Hendry</a> refuted the arguments of the prosecution that the break-in was staged. The difference in the amount of evidence against Guede versus Knox and Sollecito can be likened to a <a href="http://lesswrong.com/lw/1j7/the_amanda_knox_test_how_an_hour_on_the_internet/">strong versus a weak signal,</a> and only by pretending that the strong evidence is no better than the weak evidence can one come to the conclusion that all three are culpable. <br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The interrogation on the night of the 5th of November</span><br />The police seemed to have prior knowledge of Amanda’s text message to Patrick on the night of the murder, and the police may have known that the two of them met on the afternoon of the 5th. We also know from both Amanda’s contemporaneous statements and those of others that she was tired and scared in the days leading up to this interrogation (Candace Dempsey, Murder in Italy, Chapters 5-8). <br /><br />There are many instances of people making a combined false accusation and confession, and this is one of them. The interrogation started around 11 PM and produced two statements, one around 1:45 AM and the other around 5:45 AM. She asked whether she needed a lawyer and was told that would only make things worse. Her statement the next morning shows considerable confusion. Also, if she had been completely rational during the interrogation, she would never have accused Patrick, whether she were innocent or guilty. She believed that he was at the bar that night, which should give him a rock-solid alibi. Again, <a href="http://www.injusticeinperugia.com/FBI7.html">Steve Moore’s</a> comments are extremely useful and thought-provoking: “Why would detectives schedule an interrogation overnight? ...the reason they interrogated Amanda all night was to break her. Not get the truth, not get answers, not make Perugia safer; but to break her so that she would say what they wanted her to say.” <br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">An ordinary kitchen knife, not the murder weapon</span><br />The <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/01/amanda-knox-and-raffaele-sollecito-and.html">large knife</a> from Raffaele's flat did not match at least one and probably not two of the three major wounds. It did not match the bloody outline of a knife in Meredith’s bedroom. The DNA on the handle from Amanda was probably deposited when she used it for cooking at Raffaele’s flat. Although the arguments are sometimes <a href="http://www.sciencespheres.com/2009/10/lcn-dna-profiling-part-ii-watch-where.html">detailed</a>, <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/02/ordinary-kitchen-knife-or-murder-weapon.html">Meredith’s DNA</a> on the knife is probably due to contamination in the laboratory itself, but it may have been contaminated during its transport.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Shoeprint and footprint evidence</span><br />The police tried to insinuate some of the <a href="http://injusticeinperugia.org/FBI6.html">luminol-positive</a> footprints were due to Knox and Sollecito and that all were set in blood. This attempt was <a href="http://knoxarchives.blogspot.com/2009/11/comodi-asks-for-common-sense-posted-by.html">intellectually dishonest</a>. All of the <a href="http://injusticeinperugia.org/footprints-01.html">shoeprints</a> matched Guede’s sneakers. The luminol-positive footprints in the hall do not appear to be Meredith’s blood, inasmuch as they did not have Meredith’s DNA. The one <a href="http://www.friendsofamanda.org/footprint.html">bloody footprint</a> in the bathroom looks a little bit more like Guede’s foot than Sollecito’s foot, but attributing it to either person unequivocally is questionable at best.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Cognitive bias and tunnel vision</span><br />If they are innocent, then how did they get convicted? Amanda and Raffaele were detained and held without charge before the forensic evidence came back implicating Rudy Guede. The day of their arrest the police paraded them through the old town with lights on and horns blaring. This had only happened one time previously in Perugia, according to the memory of one citizen, when a mafia figure was arrested. By the time Guede was becoming a suspect, a major figure in the Rome police department had put Ms. Knox’s picture in the hallway, right next to the arrest of Bernardo Provenzano.<br /><br />This was not a conspiracy in the sense of a bunch of people sitting around a big table. I think it is a case where the police and public minister (PM) Mignini had made a bold claim about Knox and Sollecito’s involvement and could not back down. It may have been a situation where the forensic police (especially) felt, “To get along, go along.” In addition, the forensic scientists might have really believed that Knox and Sollecito were guilty and subconsciously tilted their results in that direction. <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2197284/">Koppl and Balko</a> wrote, “To the extent that it's possible, evidence should be stripped of all context before being sent to the lab.” Given that Knox and Sollecito were already in custody in a high-profile case before some of the evidence was even collected, it is difficult to see how all cognitive bias could have been avoided. <br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Poor forensics and lack of discovery<br /></span>The prosecution’s misrepresenting which tests were or were not done and their <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/07/to-those-who-believe-that-amanda-knox.html">withholding of electronic data files</a> underlying the DNA forensics suggests that they know how weak their case really is. But it is remarkable how much <a href="http://www.sciencespheres.com/2010/03/seven-deadly-sins-of-knoxsollecito.html<br />">they did wrong</a> or <a href="http://www.sciencespheres.com/2010/04/lie-of-month-club.html">did not do at all</a>, for no reason that I can understand. There is a possible semen stain on Meredith’s bed that was never followed up with a confirmatory test. There were three computer hard drives that the police so badly mishandled that recovery of the data has been difficult or not even attempted. The collection of the DNA evidence with dirty gloves that were seldom changed is just plain sloppy. There is evidence of Meredith’s blood mixed with Amanda’s DNA in certain places in the flat, but the <a href="http://www.friendsofamanda.org/forensics.html<br />">prosecution misleadingly implied</a> that the samples were from Knox’s blood. Since Amanda lived at the flat, finding her DNA there is not inculpatory at all.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Exculpatory evidence</span><br />Meredith is known to have returned home around 9 PM. Many small pieces of evidence point to <a href="http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/6030636/time_of_death_crucial_issue<br />_in_amanda.html?cat=17">an earlier time of death</a>, before 10 PM, than the prosecution indicated, about 11:40 PM. Meredith had left a load of laundry in the washing machine, presumably when she left to visit her friends for dinner. Yet the laundry had not been removed. Meredith was probably still wearing her zippered sweatshirt when she was attacked, the garment she wore when she was walking home on a brisk evening. Meredith unsuccessfully tried to call her ailing mother around 8:56 PM but did not attempt to reach her again. Atypically, Meredith did not send any text messages that evening. There were two calls around 10 PM that the Massei motivation report ascribes dubiously to Meredith playing with her cell phone. These activities may be evidence of her attacker trying to turn the phones off. A different cell tower sent a MMS to her phone at 10:13 PM; this falls short of proof that the cell phone had left her flat by this time, but it is consistent with the phone’s being transported at this time.<br /><br />Meredith’s stomach content and the lack of any material in the duodenum are difficult to reconcile with the time of her last meal (of pizza, then apple crumble), which started around 6:30 PM or earlier. Her friends watched a movie after eating pizza, and they stopped to eat apple crumble. Raffaele’s appeal argues that Meredith’s stomach contents indicate a much earlier time of death, by roughly two hours, to about 9:30 or so. Some argue that TOD cannot be accurately determined by stomach contents alone, but that argument can be taken too far: it is known that Meredith was alive until at least 9 PM. In lieu of a lengthy discussion of physiology, let us take a simple path. Patients are advised not to eat for six to eight hours prior to surgery involving intravenous <a href="http://www.bellinghamanesthesia.com/pageid/160/default.aspx">anesthesia</a>. This avoids the possibility that the patient will vomit and aspirate stomach contents into the lungs. Why would anesthesiology guidelines suggest six hours for a small meal if the stomach remained full after 5 to 5.5 hours?<br /><br />If her death occurred before 10 PM, then it is somewhere between unlikely and impossible that Amanda and Raffaele are guilty. They were known to be acting normally as of about 8:45 PM, when Ms. Popovic came over. Raffaele’s appeal argues that there was some computer activity long after this time, and the police who examined his computer may have not been <a href="http://church-discipline.blogspot.com/2011/01/windowserverlog-raffaele-sollecitos.html">experienced with MacIntosh products</a> enough to know where to look. Even if the undisputed computer activity ended around 9:10 PM, it is extremely difficult to see how the two of them had time to get so messed up that they lost control enough to murder someone before 10 PM.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Final thoughts</span><br />The appeals process has begun with an examination of the DNA forensics of the kitchen knife and the bra clasp. If the computer evidence is reexamined and the stomach contents are reevaluated, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito have a reasonable chance of exoneration as a result of their appeal.Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com63tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-48563319081620721892010-10-22T18:30:00.004-04:002012-01-31T21:28:56.325-05:00The American Bar Association and DNA electronic data files<span style="font-weight:bold;">Part 24 in the Knox/Sollecito case</span><br /><br />It is sometimes claimed that the defense teams of Ms. Knox and Mr. Sollecito failed to show up for the DNA forensic testing in this case. Therefore, they do not know what went on and do not have cause to complain about the testing methods or lack of disclosure. This argument is false on a number of fronts. Ms. Knox’s stepfather Chris Mellas said that the defense was given only a few hours of notification, yet Rome is a considerable drive from Perugia (in addition to the defense having other responsibilities). This argument also ignores the fact that several of the experts from the defense only came aboard long after the testing was over. It is absurd to contend that they should be denied free access to the data. However, another problem with this argument is that it assumes that observing the testing is really that critical in the first place.<br /><br />I posed the question of whether it would be more useful to observe the testing or to have the electronic data files to Professor Dan Krane, one of the cosigners of the open letter on the DNA forensics of this case. He responded:<br /><br />“Having the electronic data for review is enormously important. Having the opportunity to witness the testing of samples is of marginal utility at best. Reviews of the underlying data for DNA tests often reveals alternative interpretations of the evidence samples, especially in circumstances were small amounts of DNA are involved and it is difficult to distinguish between signal, noise, and technical artifacts. Observing testing rarely provides any more insights than what should be possible from a review of contemporaneous notes that should be part of a lab's case file. Witnessing testing is far from a cure-all. Problems such as contamination of samples can easily arise before a sample arrives in a laboratory yet could not be detected by an expert observing the testing process itself.”<br /><br />The subject of the <a href="http://www.americanbar.org/publications/criminal_justice_section_archive/crimjust_standards_dnaevidence.html#4.1">electronic data files</a> has been a major theme of this blog’s coverage of the Knox/Sollecito case. Every expert whom I have contacted has spoken in support of full release, and some private DNA forensic companies even have a standard form for the defense to fill out to obtain them. Another benefit of full release of all case files is that <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010_05_01_archive.html">serious clerical errors</a> are occasionally found and corrected.<br /><br />In addition to forensic experts, legal experts within the United States support complete disclosure of all pertinent information, including but not limited to the electronic data files. Nothing close to full disclosure happened in this case. <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/7601679/Amanda-Knoxs-lawyers-file-appeal-in-Perugia.html">Bob Graham</a> wrote, “It has also emerged that the prosecution has failed to deliver to the defence all the paperwork and documentation related to the forensic testing.” He reported on the prosecution’s response: “Deputy prosecutor Manuela Comodi brushed off the request for all forensic documentation and added: ‘They have everything they need. That is enough.’”<br /><br />The American Bar Association’s Criminal Justice Section Standards on <a href="http://www.abanet.org/crimjust/standards/dnaevidence.html#4.1">DNA evidence</a> discusses disclosure in section 4.1:<br />(a) The prosecutor should be required, within a specified and reasonable time prior to trial, to make available to the defense the following information and material relating to DNA evidence:<br />(iii) the laboratory case file and case notes;<br />(iv) a curriculum vitae for each testifying expert and for each person involved in the testing;<br />(viii) all raw electronic data produced during testing;<br />(ix) reports of laboratory contamination and other laboratory problems affecting testing procedures or results relevant to the evaluation of the procedures and test results obtained in the case and corrective actions taken in response; and<br /><br />Obviously the Italian courts are not bound by the ABA’s guidelines. However, the ABA guidelines are additional documentation, as if any were required, that release of the electronic data files is a near-universal norm in most nations. Ms. Comodi indicating that she has the right to decide what documentation is enough is remarkable given the unanimity of opinion on the usefulness of full disclosure among DNA forensic experts.Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com19tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-64985470363728566282010-09-27T21:13:00.010-04:002010-09-28T23:21:05.708-04:00An overview of some DNA evidence in the murder of Meredith KercherPart 23 in the Knox/Sollecito case<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Executive summary</span><br />The most severe problems with the bra clasp are that three other partial profiles are present, that it was moved by unknown means before it was collected, that it was handled way too much during its collection, and that it might be within LCN range. Massei’s reasoning with respect to the disputed loci is fundamentally flawed. The most severe problems with Meredith’s profile on the knife are lack of blood, the low peak heights, the alleles that dropped in and dropped out, and the fact that an inferior version of low copy number (LCN) DNA analysis was used. Amanda’s DNA found with Meredith’s blood is not inculpatory, because DNA in one’s home is rarely out of the ordinary, and there are collection problems with these samples. Finally, the electronic data files were not released, and this has hampered the ability of the defense to challenge the evidence properly.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">General defense arguments</span><br />Besides the argument that a profile is insufficient to identify a person (see below), an argument that the defense can use is that the DNA is present due to innocent activity. For example, Amanda’s DNA on the handle of the knife may be due to her using it to cook. In addition, the defense can argue three things with respect to how a defendant’s DNA came to be on an item of evidence: secondary/tertiary transfer, contamination, and evidence tampering.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The legal standard for a DNA profile and low copy number DNA</span><br />One argument that the defense can use is to say that a given DNA profile fails to clear the legal bar for identifying someone. One might use the analogy to a partial fingerprint. An example here is the necessity of testing low copy number (LCN) DNA twice, whereas the knife was only tested once. The bra clasp falls into a gray area in terms the amount of Raffaele’s DNA present; the defense is arguing that it, too, falls into the LCN range. Meredith’s profile on the knife also shows other evidence of being in the LCN range, such as peak height imbalance. Moreover, the majority of the peaks are below 50 RFU in peak height, most labs have set a threshold of at least 50 RFU as the minimum height for a peak to be counted. Meredith’s DNA profile should not have been accepted by the court as evidence, and Raffaele’s lawyers may have success with their argument. <br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Contamination</span><br />If we only allowed the contamination argument in cases where the defense could demonstrate the exact mechanism of when and how it happened, we would <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/01/forensic-dna-contamination.html">exclude known cases</a> where it did happen. The prosecution must perform negative controls under the same conditions as the evidence and disclose the results of these control experiments to the defense. If DNA shows up in the negative controls, my understanding is that all evidentiary samples processed at the same time must be performed over. When no rational explanation for the presence of DNA on an item can be offered, one is forced to assume that the DNA arrived via contamination. Some cases of DNA contamination are the <a href="http://www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/0/6285f6867724e1e685257124006f9177">Jaidyn Leskie</a> murder, the<a href="http://www.garyisinnocent.org/web/CaseHistory/NewDNAFindings/DNAisNOTFoolproof/tabid/59/Default.aspx"> Jane Mixer</a> murder, the <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/02/farah-jama-and-forensic-dna.html">Farah Jama</a> rape case, the <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/the-dark-side-of-dna/article1499631/">Gregory Turner</a> case, and the <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/06/dna-contamination-and-dna-cold-hits.html">profile N case in New Zealand</a>.<br /><br />The <a href="http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/contamination.html">lack of frequent glove changes</a> and the handling of the clasp by many forensic technicians are problematic for the prosecution. Moreover, Dr. Stefanoni’s testimony as presented in the Massei report (pp. 202-203 in the English translation at Perugia Murder FIle) on this subject is open to serious challenge. Her argument is that they did not change gloves with respect to a certain item of evidence and this piece of evidence did not show contamination. Therefore, contamination is difficult, requiring either liquids or vigorous rubbing. This view seems to be at odds with the consensus of the field, as well as the facts of the Gregory Turner case, which involved transfer of DNA from fingernails to a wedding ring.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Confirmation bias</span><br />Not doing what amounts to substrate controls on the mixed Knox/Kercher DNA samples might have been due to confirmation bias. Not obtaining DNA reference samples from Laura and Filomena are behaviors consistent with confirmation bias. Using a lower peak height threshold for the knife than any other piece of evidence contradicts the words of an<a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/01/amanda-knox-and-raffaele-sollecito-and.html"> introductory textbook</a> on DNA forensics as well as general scientific principles. However, there is an additional reason to suspect that some form of investigator bias was at work with respect to the knife profile. <a href="http://www.friendsofamanda.org/selected_dna_results.pdf">Sample 164</a> was blood from the wall of a bedroom, but it was not tested because of a “negative preliminary (quantification) result.” One surmises that there was not enough DNA to continue the forensic analysis. Why should testing have been stopped for item 164, which had blood, when it was continued for the knife, which had no blood?<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Expert testimony</span><br />The prosecution’s witnesses and the defense’s witnesses do not have equal scientific standing. Dr. Stefanoni has not published any articles on DNA forensics of which I am aware. On the other hand the nine signers of the open letter (Dr. Johnson, Dr. Hampikian, and the seven co-signers) publish regularly. That is not to say that publication record or academic prestige is everything; there is also variation in the abilities of expert witnesses to convince a jury that they are correct. In this matter the defense may have not fared as well.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The bra clasp</span><br />The following discussion assumes that a full DNA profile corresponding to Raffaele Sollecito’s is present, but that does not answer the question of how or when it got there. One problem with the bra clasp as evidence against Raffaele is that his DNA is not found on the bra itself, a point that his <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/01/meredith-kerchers-bra-clasp.html">lawyers raised</a> in the Micheli preliminary hearing. A more serious problem is that partial profiles of three other people have also been reported.<br /><br />An answer to the question of how Raffaele’s DNA was deposited on the clasp is that it might have been deposited the same way as three DNA profiles from unknown individuals. To put it another way, if we acknowledge that DNA from three unknown individuals came to be on the clasp innocently, then what makes Raffaele’s DNA different? It is very unlikely that four people handed the bra clasp as part of a sexual assault and murder. Primary transfer before the assault seems equally unlikely; most people fold their own laundry, and someone else folding it would only account for one profile. So the unknown DNA had to arrive either from <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/05/secondary-transfer-of-dna-and-dna.html">secondary transfer or from contamination</a>.<br /><br />One possibility involving secondary transfer involves the towels. The towels that Rudy probably took from the bathroom might have had DNA from anyone who washed his or her hands in the bathroom and used the towels to dry off, including Raffaele, who had cooked there. If the towel were placed over the clasp and stepped on, it could transfer DNA to the clasp. This might also explain the deformation of the clasp. Another possible route of secondary transfer is that whoever moved the clasp before it was collected deposited Raffaele’s DNA (possibly originating from the door).<br /><br />There is a good deal of misunderstanding involving DNA contamination and the clasp. It is often said that the only item that tested positive for Raffaele’s DNA was a cigarette butt, and so how could contamination occur? There are several problems with this argument. First, one should not equate the DNA that the investigators found with the total amount of DNA Raffaele left at the cottage. The investigators seemed to be focused on blood, as well as Meredith’s body. They were not taking a random sampling of the cottage. Second, there is no reason to exclude contamination from the cigarette butt in the lab, although if they were tested far apart in time, contamination is less likely. Third, Raffaele’s reference sample is a potentially serious source of contamination. In PCR-based DNA forensics, the DNA is amplified very roughly a millionfold in amount. That is why good labs separate the pre-PCR from the post PCR-samples.<br /><br />The amount of Raffaele’s DNA on the clasp is borderline LCN. If it is judged to be below the LCN cutoff, it would ordinarily have to be tested twice and only those alleles that showed up in both runs should be counted. It is sometimes said that the amount of Raffaele’s DNA was so large as to mean that it could only arise from vigorous rubbing (primary transfer). The fact that the amount of DNA is actually low would seem contradict such an argument. However, it is the premise that is wrong; the DNA profile itself can rarely give an indication of when and how it was deposited. One cannot rule out primary transfer when the amount of DNA is low any more than one can rule out secondary transfer when the amount of DNA.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Raffaele’s appeal with respect to the bra clasp</span><br />The discussion above presumes that a good, complete profile was found. However, Dr. Tagliabracci disputed that the profile matched Raffaele’s for at least six of the loci. If Sollecito’s profile were strong and if the bra clasp DNA were not a mixture, there might be fewer opportunities for disagreement between Dr. Tagliabracci and Dr. Stefanoni. Of the six disputed loci from the bra clasp DNA profile, Massei wrote (pp. 296-297 of the Perugia Murder File English translation):<br /><br />“Consequently, there are apparently a considerable number of loci that are not the subject of dispute, a number which seems to be greater than the number of disputed loci and greater than the number of six loci with reference to which Professor Tagliabracci had previously declared, before the current systems were available‚ it was enough ... we made hypotheses even with six loci‛ (page [319] 103). The circumstance now exposed allows, it was held, the following consideration: if, despite the subjective contribution of the geneticist, the interpretative disagreement regarding the non-compatibility of Raffaele Sollecito’s profile with the loci that had contributed to forming trace 165B involved those loci indicated by Professor Tagliabracci during the course of the hearing and at pages 20 and 21 of the previously mentioned memorandum conclusions, it must be held that, for the greatest number of loci at least, the peaks were so clear and the interpretation so sound that they could not be contested. Consequently, the overall result should be considered fully reliable, even disregarding the repetition of the analysis. It should however be noted that Dr. Stefanoni, during the hearing at which she testified, had offered suitable explanations and answers which this Court considers acceptable.”<br /><br />Raffaele’s appeal document correctly notes that Massei’s argument about the numbers of disputed and undisputed loci is contrary to the principles of forensic genetics. Let us assume that the data are clear enough to avoid ambiguity and consider the following analogy. Suppose that a winning lottery number is 12497<span style="font-weight:bold;">6</span>35834, and I have a lottery ticket that is 12497<span style="font-weight:bold;">2</span>35834. And suppose I claim that since my ticket has 10 out of the 11 numbers identical, I am a winner. That argument makes as much sense as Massei’s does.<br /><br />But what of Dr. Tagliabracci’s statement that six loci used to be enough to form hypotheses? Suppose that initially a complete profile consisted of six loci. If a person matched all six loci, he or she would not be excluded as the DNA donor to that sample. However, if that person matched at only 5 loci and failed to match at the sixth locus, then he or she would be excluded. Now suppose an improved test with 10 loci became available. Then a person who matched all ten loci would not be excluded, and the number of other people who could also match would be much smaller than in the case with 6 loci. However, a person who matched at 9 loci but failed to match the tenth locus would still be excluded, even though 9 is greater than 6.<br /><br />Massei must believe that at all six disputed loci, the DNA is Raffaele’s, or at the very least that the results in all six loci are indeterminate (if the latter were true, it would indicate that Raffaele’s DNA constituted a partial profile, not a complete one). Massei does not provide a clear reason for rejecting Dr. Tagliabracci’s assessment in favor of Dr. Stefanoni’s. It is difficult to see why a sentencing report the fails to provide reasons is any better than no sentencing report at all. <br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The knife profile</span><br />The peak heights on the DNA profile culled from the kitchen knife are all below 100 relative fluorescence units (RFU), and most are below 40 RFU. This is below any threshold of which I am aware. What was the harm in using a lower peak threshold? One can argue that it obliges the forensic scientist to use the same threshold for all the samples on the basis of consistency. It is a dollars-to-donuts bet that some evidence of contamination could be found at this atypically low peak threshold among the hundreds of samples run.<br /><br />There is no detectable blood on the knife. The open letter asserts that if a bloody knife were cleaned, one would remove detectable traces of DNA before detectable traces of blood. If one claims that the DNA arose from other tissue, then I would ask how it is possible to remove blood cells and not other cells. The cleaning problem only grows more severe if one claims that the knife were cleaned with bleach and that traces of bleach were found. Even trace amounts of bleach are known to destroy DNA for forensic profiling.<br /><br /><a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/02/ordinary-kitchen-knife-or-murder-weapon.html">The profile</a> shows evidence of alleles dropping in and dropping out. In other words there is one allele where Meredith’s profile is weak or absent, and there is one locus with two peaks that are not part of Meredith’s profile. The peaks within each locus are often very uneven (as much as roughly threefold) in peak height, yet they should be approximately the same height in a good profile. These problems are to be expected when DNA is in the low copy number (LCN) range. When DNA falls into such a low range of amounts, forensic scientists generally test it at least twice and accept only those peaks that appear in both runs. <br /><br />One can argue that LCN profiling should ordinarily be accepted by a court. However, Dr. Stefanoni used an <a href="http://www.sciencespheres.com/2009/10/lcn-dna-profiling-part-ii-watch-where.html">inferior version of LCN DNA profiling</a>, one that has never appeared in the scientific literature. LCN profiling is typically done in specialized buildings, away from the laboratory doing regular profiling. These precautions are necessary because LCN profiling is more prone to contamination than ordinary PCR-based profiling. These precautions were not followed with respect to the knife, and it was only tested once.<br /><br />Another problem with the knife is that the second officer to have possession of the knife was at Meredith’s cottage just before receiving it. This raises the odds of contamination outside of the lab. Meredith’s profile probably arose through contamination in the laboratory, but contamination during the time it was taken into custody is also a possibility.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The mixed DNA samples</span><br />A number of samples that appeared to be blood had both Meredith’s and Amanda’s DNA. Three of the <a href="http://www.friendsofamanda.org/mixed_dna.html">mixed DNA samples</a> were probably blood and three may or may not have been blood. This would be very weak evidence under most conditions. Amanda’s DNA is expected to be in many locations in her own home. The fact that samples were not taken close to the blood (essentially substrate controls) means that one cannot rule out an innocent explanation for their existence. To argue that these samples are inculpatory, one is almost forced to assume that Amanda’s DNA is from her blood. White blood cells contain DNA; therefore, Amanda’s DNA might have arisen from her blood. Yet without characterizing or quantifying the amount of biological material that gave rise to her DNA, there is no reason to believe that the samples must be from blood. No such tests were done.<br /><br />However, the prosecution has two additional problems with its case. First, Dr. Stefanoni did not change gloves when collecting multiple samples (see above). Therefore, she might have mixed samples herself. Second, at least one of these samples had a third profile in it, from an unknown individual. If this person’s DNA arose from innocent means, there is no reason to exclude the possibility that Amanda’s did also. <br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The lack of DNA</span><br />The lack of Raffaele’s DNA or Amanda’s DNA on Meredith’s body, when Raffaele is thought to have restrained her and Amanda to have throttled her calls into question this part of the prosecution’s narrative. The number of actual instances where DNA was used in <a href="http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2010/07/dna-transfer-in-strangulation.html">strangulation cases</a> where the DNA originated from the victim’s neck, as opposed to the victim’s fingernails, is small. However, some instances of alleged domestic violence cases have used swabbing of bruised or reddened areas on the alleged victim as evidence.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Conclusions</span><br />The way that the bra clasp was handled and the lack of a clear chain of custody cast doubt on this piece of evidence. The lack of blood on the knife calls into grave question whether the DNA got there before or after the police took it into evidence, as argued in the Johnson/Hampikian open letter. Secondary transfer is a likely means for Raffaele’s DNA being in the bra clasp, and contamination, either in the lab or during collection, is a likely means for Meredith’s DNA being found on the knife. The mixed DNA samples are virtually meaningless. The single most troubling aspect of the DNA evidence is the lack of full disclosure of the electronic data files and other documentation relating to the DNA forensics. The prosecution is acting as if it had something to hide.Chris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.com8